Trial reportInternational journal of epidemiology2025
Improving retrospective data on recent household deaths: a multi-arm randomized trial in Guinea-Bissau.
Trial report in International journal of epidemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn countries with limited civil registration and vital statistics systems, assessing the impact of health crises requires precise retrospective mortality data. We tested whether calendar methods improve survey or census data on dates of recent household deaths registered in a Health and Demographic Surveillance System (HDSS).
methodsBetween April and June 2023, we randomized 578 households with HDSS-registered deaths in Guinea-Bissau to interviews by using (i) a standard questionnaire with close-ended questions about dates of deaths, or similar questionnaires supplemented with (ii) a physical calendar of local events printed on paper or (iii) a digital calendar implemented on tablets. We evaluated the accuracy of reported dates through record linkages to HDSS data.
resultsNo deaths were reported in 11.8% of the 508 participating households. In other households (n = 448), informants reported 574 deaths since January 2020. Relative to the standard questionnaire, neither the physical calendar nor the digital calendar improved the proportion of deaths reported in the same month and year as recorded by using surveillance data. The physical and digital calendars reduced the share of missing data on dates of deaths (6.1% and 3.2%, respectively, versus 13.1% with the standard questionnaire). Reported dates of deaths obtained by using the digital calendar were more weakly correlated with surveillance data than those collected in other arms. Using the digital calendar also added 1.15 minutes to the data collection.
conclusionDigital calendars do not improve the reporting of dates of deaths in surveys or censuses. Further trials of the use of a physical calendar in retrospective interviews about recent household deaths are warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.