Back

Causes of Pediatric Deaths in Lusaka, Zambia: A Quantitative Geographic Information Systems Approach

Sportiello, K.; Shah, M.; Buda, A.; Mwanza, I.; Mathews, M.; Bearden, D. R.

2024-09-18 public and global health
10.1101/2024.09.17.24313836 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundWhile childhood mortality has been declining in Zambia, it remains high at 58 per 1000 live births. Importantly, many leading causes of mortality in Zambia are preventable. This study was conducted to identify clusters of childhood mortality, causes of death of recently deceased children, barriers to care, and risk factors for mortality in Lusaka, Zambia. MethodsThis study was conducted as a prospective cohort study. Family members or lawfully authorized representatives (LARs) were interviewed when they came to pick up death certificates for recently deceased children from Lusaka Childrens Hospital. Each interview included a verbal autopsy, determination of the childs location of residence, and collection of demographic information. Demographic data was also collected from a healthy control group. Quantitative Geographic Information Systems was used to visualize mortality and evaluate for clustering. ResultsLeading primary causes of death included malnutrition (21%), complications of chronic illnesses (16%), and central nervous system infections (13%), while the leading barriers to care were cost (58%) and difficulties with travel (53%). Compared to controls, recently deceased children came from families with significantly lower incomes (1905 Kwacha vs. 2412 Kwacha, p = 0.03) and were significantly more likely to have a history of malnutrition (16.7% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.005). Mortality was clustered in two high-population density, low-income neighborhoods in Lusaka. ConclusionsSystems to reduce financial barriers to care and improve access to transportation could reduce childhood mortality in Lusaka. The aforementioned neighborhoods are ideal locations for public health interventions or improved healthcare services.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.