↓ Skip to main content

Improving program targeting to combat early-life mortality by identifying high-risk births: an application to India

Overview of attention for article published in Population Health Metrics, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Improving program targeting to combat early-life mortality by identifying high-risk births: an application to India
Published in
Population Health Metrics, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12963-018-0172-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antonio P. Ramos, Robert E. Weiss, Jody S. Heymann

Abstract

It is widely recognized that there are multiple risk factors for early-life mortality. In practice most interventions to curb early-life mortality target births based on a single risk factor, such as poverty. However, most premature deaths are not from the targeted group. Thus interventions target many births that are at not at high risk and miss many births at high risk. Using data from the second wave of Demographic and Health Surveys from India and a hierarchical Bayesian model, we estimate infant mortality risk for 73.320 infants in India as a function of 4 risk factors. We show how this information can be used to improve program targeting. We compare our novel approach against common programs that target groups based on a single risk factor. A conventional approach that targets mothers in the lowest quintile of income correctly identifies only 30% of infant deaths. By contrast, using four risk factors simultaneously we identify a group of births of the same size that includes 57% of all deaths. Using the 2012 census to translate these percentages into numbers, there were 25.642.200 births in 2012 and 4.4% died before the age of one. Our approach correctly identifies 643.106 of 1.128.257 infant deaths while poverty only identifies 338.477 infant deaths. Our approach considerably improves program targeting by identifying more infant deaths than the usual approach that targets births based on a single risk factor. This leads to more efficient program targeting. This is particularly useful in developing countries, where resources are lacking and needs are high.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Lecturer 2 4%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 19 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Social Sciences 4 8%
Arts and Humanities 2 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 25 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 August 2020.
All research outputs
#3,663,298
of 23,100,534 outputs
Outputs from Population Health Metrics
#94
of 392 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,439
of 334,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Population Health Metrics
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,100,534 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 392 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,232 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.