RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 From raw data to a score: Comparing quantitative methods that construct multi-level composite implementation strength scores of family planning programs in Malawi
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.10.21.21265134
DO 10.1101/2021.10.21.21265134
A1 Pattnaik, Anooj
A1 Mohan, Diwakar
A1 Zeger, Scott
A1 Kanyuka, Mercy
A1 Kachale, Fannie
A1 Marx, Melissa A.
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/10/26/2021.10.21.21265134.abstract
AB Background Data that capture implementation strength can be combined in multiple ways across content and health system levels to create a summary measure that can help us to explore and compare program implementation across facility catchment areas. Summary indices can make it easier for national policymakers to understand and address variation in strength of program implementation across jurisdictions. In this paper we describe development of an index that we used to describe the district-level strength of implementation of Malawi’s national family planning program.Methods To develop the index, we used data collected during a 2017 national, health facility- and community health worker Implementation Strength Assessment survey in Malawi to test different methods to combine indicators within and then across domains (4 methods – simple additive, weighted additive, principal components analysis, exploratory factor analysis) and combine scores across health facility and community health worker levels (2 methods – simple average and mixed effects model) to create a catchment area-level summary score for each health facility in Malawi. We explored how well each model captures variation and predicts couple-years protection and how feasible it is to conduct each type of analysis and the resulting interpretability.Results We found little difference in how the four methods combined indicator data at the individual and combined levels of the health system. However, there were major differences when combining scores across health system levels to obtain a score at the health facility catchment area level. The scores resulting from the mixed effects model were able to better discriminate differences between catchment area scores compared to the simple average method. The scores using the mixed effects combination method also demonstrated more of a dose-response relationship with couple-years protection.Conclusions The summary measure that was calculated from the mixed effects combination method captured the variation of strength of implementation of Malawi’s national family planning program at the health facility catchment area level. However, the best method for creating an index should be based on pros and cons listed, not least, analyst capacity and ease of interpretability of findings. Ultimately, the resulting summary measure can aid decisionmakers in understanding the combined effect of multiple aspects of programs being implemented in their health system and comparing strengths of programs across geographies.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementFor this study, we received funding from Global Affairs of Canada on two grants: 1) Real Accountability: Data Analysis for Results (RADAR) and the National Evaluation Program (NEP) projects. The URL for the funder, Global Affairs of Canada, is: https://www.international.gc.ca/gac-amc/index.aspx?lang=eng The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscriptAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This study was approved by the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health Institutional Review Board and the Malawi National Health Science Research Committee to collect this health facility and worker data in April 2017I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authorsAICAkaike information criteriaCACatchment areaCBDACommunity-based distribution agentCHAMChristian Health Association of MalawiCHWCommunity health workerCYPCouple-years protectionEFAExploratory factor analysisFPFamily planningHFWHealth facility workerHSAHealth surveillance agentICIn-Charge (of a health facility)IQRInter-quartile rangeISImplementation strengthISAImplementation strength assessmentLMICLower and middle income countrymCPRModern contraceptive prevalence rateMOHMinistry of HealthMEMMixed effects modelNEPNational Evaluation ProgramNGONon-governmental organizationNSONational Statistics OfficePCAPrincipal components analysisQoCQuality of careSASimple additiveSPAService provision assessmentWAWeighted additiveYFHSYouth-friendly health services