IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1001288.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Child Mortality Estimation: A Comparison of UN IGME and IHME Estimates of Levels and Trends in Under-Five Mortality Rates and Deaths

Author

Listed:
  • Leontine Alkema
  • Danzhen You

Abstract

Leontine Alkema and Danzhen You compare and summarize differences in underlying data and modelling approaches used by two key groups who publish data on global under-5 mortality rates Background: Millennium Development Goal 4 calls for a reduction in the under-five mortality rate (U5MR) by two-thirds between 1990 and 2015. In 2011, estimates were published by the United Nations Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation (UN IGME) and the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME). The difference in the U5MR estimates produced by the two research groups was more than 10% and corresponded to more than ten deaths per 1,000 live births for 10% of all countries in 1990 and 20% of all countries in 2010, which can lead to conflicting conclusions with respect to countries' progress. To understand what caused the differences in estimates, we summarised differences in underlying data and modelling approaches used by the two groups, and analysed their effects. Methods and Findings: UN IGME and IHME estimation approaches differ with respect to the construction of databases and the pre-processing of data, trend fitting procedures, inclusion and exclusion of data series, and additional adjustment procedures. Large differences in U5MR estimates between the UN IGME and the IHME exist in countries with conflicts or civil unrest, countries with high HIV prevalence, and countries where the underlying data used to derive the estimates were different, especially if the exclusion of data series differed between the two research groups. A decomposition of the differences showed that differences in estimates due to using different data (inclusion of data series and pre-processing of data) are on average larger than the differences due to using different trend fitting methods. Conclusions: Substantial country-specific differences between UN IGME and IHME estimates for U5MR and the number of under-five deaths exist because of various differences in data and modelling assumptions used. Often differences are illustrative of the lack of reliable data and likely to decrease as more data become available. Improved transparency on methods and data used will help to improve understanding about the drivers of the differences. Background: In 2010, more than seven million children died before they reached their fifth birthday, and the global under-five mortality rate (also denoted in the literature as U5MR and 5q0) was 57 deaths per 1,000 live births. Most deaths before the age of five years occur in developing countries (about half occur in just five countries—India, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Pakistan, and China), and most are caused by preventable or treatable diseases such as pneumonia, diarrhea, and malaria. Faced with this largely avoidable loss of young lives, in 1990, the United Nations (UN) World Summit for Children pledged to improve the survival of children. Later, in 2000, world leaders set a target of reducing under-five mortality to one-third of its 1990 level (12 million) by 2015, as Millennium Development Goal 4 (MDG 4). This goal, together with seven others, is designed to improve the social, economic, and health conditions in the world's poorest countries. Why Was This Study Done?: Although progress towards MDG 4 is accelerating, MDG 4 is unlikely to be reached. It is important, therefore, to know which countries are making poor progress towards MDG 4 so that extra resources can be concentrated in these areas. To monitor both national and global progress, accurate, up-to-date estimates of U5MR are essential. The first step in estimating U5MR is the collection of data on child deaths, usually through vital registration systems (which record all births and deaths) in developed countries and through surveys that ask women about their living and dead children in developing countries. Country-specific U5MR estimates that are comparable over time and across countries are obtained from these data using a statistical process called trend fitting. Two groups—the UN Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation (UN IGME) and the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME)—recently published new estimates of the levels and trends in U5MR and under-five deaths across the world. However, their estimates differ somewhat and, for some countries, disagree on the progress being made towards MDG 4. Here, the researchers examine the differences in the underlying data and the trend fitting approaches used by the UN IGME and the IHME to try to understand why their estimates are different. What Did the Researchers Do and Find?: The researchers first compared the estimates produced by the two groups. From 1990 to 2010, the UN IGME's global estimates of U5MR and under-five deaths were consistently slightly higher than those of the IHME. For example, in 2010, the UN IGME and IMHE estimates of U5MR were 56.7 and 53.9 deaths per 1,000 births, respectively. However, although the global estimates from the two groups were broadly similar, there were important differences between the two sets of estimates at the country level, particularly in countries where there was conflict or civil unrest (for example, Somalia) or high HIV prevalence. The researchers then examined the data used by the two groups to estimate under-five deaths and U5MR, the method used for U5MR trend fitting, and additional adjustment procedures (for example, the UN IGME incorporates feedback from experts and country consultations in its estimates). The UN IGME and IHME estimation approaches included differences in all of these areas, but differences in the data used caused on average larger differences in the estimates than the use of different trend fitting methods did. What Do These Findings Mean?: These findings show that the substantial country-specific differences between UN IGME and IHME estimates for U5MR and the number of under-five deaths are the result of several differences between the data and trend fitting methods used by the two groups. In particular, the findings indicate that the lack of reliable data in many developing countries, especially those where there is civil unrest or ongoing conflicts, is often responsible for differences in estimates. These differences should, therefore, decrease as more reliable data become available. For now, though, the differences between the UN IGME and IHME national estimates of child mortality may cause confusion about the true extent of progress towards MDG 4 and could foster policy inactivity if the reasons for the discrepancies are not made clear. The researchers call, therefore, for more transparency on the methods and data used in the estimation of U5MR and for a concerted effort by governments, UN agencies, and non-governmental organizations to improve the collection of reliable data on child deaths. Additional Information: Please access these websites via the online version of this summary at http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001288.

Suggested Citation

  • Leontine Alkema & Danzhen You, 2012. "Child Mortality Estimation: A Comparison of UN IGME and IHME Estimates of Levels and Trends in Under-Five Mortality Rates and Deaths," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-18, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1001288
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001288
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001288
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001288&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001288?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jon Pedersen & Jing Liu, 2012. "Child Mortality Estimation: Appropriate Time Periods for Child Mortality Estimates from Full Birth Histories," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-13, August.
    2. J Ties Boerma & Colin Mathers & Carla Abou-Zahr, 2010. "WHO and Global Health Monitoring: The Way Forward," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-3, November.
    3. Julie Knoll Rajaratnam & Linda N Tran & Alan D Lopez & Christopher J L Murray, 2010. "Measuring Under-Five Mortality: Validation of New Low-Cost Methods," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(4), pages 1-24, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Leontine Alkema & Jin Rou New, 2012. "Progress toward Global Reduction in Under-Five Mortality: A Bootstrap Analysis of Uncertainty in Millennium Development Goal 4 Estimates," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-12, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Colin Mathers & Ties Boerma, 2010. "Mortality Measurement Matters: Improving Data Collection and Estimation Methods for Child and Adult Mortality," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(4), pages 1-3, April.
    2. Katherine Wilson & Jon Wakefield, 2022. "A probabilistic model for analyzing summary birth history data," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 47(11), pages 291-344.
    3. Hathi, Payal, 2022. "Population science implications of the inclusion of stillbirths in demographic estimates of child mortality," SocArXiv sz8n9, Center for Open Science.
    4. Jonathan Wakefield & Taylor Okonek & Jon Pedersen, 2020. "Small Area Estimation for Disease Prevalence Mapping," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 88(2), pages 398-418, August.
    5. Muhammad Asif Wazir & Anne Goujon, 2019. "Assessing the 2017 Census of Pakistan Using Demographic Analysis: A Sub-National Perspective," VID Working Papers 1906, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna.
    6. Katie Wilson & Jon Wakefield, 2021. "Child mortality estimation incorporating summary birth history data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 77(4), pages 1456-1466, December.
    7. Leontine Alkema & Jin Rou New, 2012. "Progress toward Global Reduction in Under-Five Mortality: A Bootstrap Analysis of Uncertainty in Millennium Development Goal 4 Estimates," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-12, December.
    8. Romesh Silva & Agbessi Amouzou & Melinda Munos & Andrew Marsh & Elizabeth Hazel & Cesar Victora & Robert Black & Jennifer Bryce & RMM Working Group, 2016. "Can Community Health Workers Report Accurately on Births and Deaths? Results of Field Assessments in Ethiopia, Malawi and Mali," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, January.
    9. Mosseveld, Cornelis van & Polanen Petel, Vincent van & Hernández-Peña, Patricia & Verbiest, Piet, 2018. "Health expenditure data for policy: Health accounts, national accounts or both?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(8), pages 885-891.
    10. Hathi, Payal, 2022. "Population science implications of the inclusion of stillbirths in demographic estimates of child mortality," SocArXiv sz8n9_v1, Center for Open Science.
    11. Aalok Ranjan Chaurasia, 2023. "Human Development in Districts of India, 2019–2021," Indian Journal of Human Development, , vol. 17(2), pages 219-252, August.
    12. Laura Schmidt & Mahmoud Elkasabi, 2022. "Accumulating Birth Histories Across Surveys for Improved Estimates of Child Mortality," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 41(5), pages 2177-2209, October.
    13. Leontine Alkema & Jin Rou New & Jon Pedersen & Danzhen You & all members of the UN Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation and its Technical Advisory Group, 2014. "Child Mortality Estimation 2013: An Overview of Updates in Estimation Methods by the United Nations Inter-Agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-13, July.
    14. Monica Alexander & Leontine Alkema, 2018. "Global estimation of neonatal mortality using a Bayesian hierarchical splines regression model," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 38(15), pages 335-372.
    15. Donela Besada & Kate Kerber & Natalie Leon & David Sanders & Emmanuelle Daviaud & Sarah Rohde & Jon Rohde & Wim van Damme & Mary Kinney & Samuel Manda & Nicholas P Oliphant & Fatima Hachimou & Adama O, 2016. "Niger’s Child Survival Success, Contributing Factors and Challenges to Sustainability: A Retrospective Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, January.
    16. Gupta, Aashish, 2020. "Seasonal variation in infant mortality in India," SocArXiv x4rv7_v1, Center for Open Science.
    17. Gupta, Aashish, 2020. "Seasonal variation in infant mortality in India," SocArXiv x4rv7, Center for Open Science.
    18. Bruno Masquelier & Benjamin-Samuel Schlüter & Atoumane Fall & Stephane Helleringer & Ashira Menashe-Oren, 2024. "Improving old-age mortality estimation with parental survival histories in surveys," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 51(45), pages 1429-1470.
    19. Fatih Chellai, 2021. "Determinants of Under-Five Child Mortality in Arab Countries. Are the Effects Homogeneous Across Birth Order and Among Countries?," European Review of Applied Sociology, Sciendo, vol. 14(23), pages 34-49, December.
    20. Alkema Leontine & Wong Maria B. & Seah Pei Rong, 2012. "Monitoring Progress Towards Millennium Development Goal 4: A Call for Improved Validation of Under-Five Mortality Rate Estimates," Statistics, Politics and Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 3(2), pages 1-19, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1001288. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.