RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Registration and medical certification of deaths in the Indian States: A comparative analysis of data of CRS and MCCD reports (2010-2019)
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.12.09.21267291
DO 10.1101/2021.12.09.21267291
A1 Pandey, Anuj Kumar
A1 Gautam, Diksha
A1 Thomas M, Benson
A1 Kharakwal, Yogita
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267291.abstract
AB Background The medical certification of cause of death (MCCD) under Civil Registration System (CRS) has been implemented in the States/UTs in a phased manner to provide data on cause of death but due to incomplete coverage and inadequate quality of civil registration data and medically certified data system, use of this data has been compromised. The completeness of registration of death (CoRD) and completeness of medically certified deaths were assessed from 2010 to 2019 at state level to understand their current status and trend over time and also to identify gaps in data to improve data quality.Methods CoRD and CoMeRD for each year for each state was calculated from the CRS reports and MCCD reports respectively for the period 2010-2019. Data were analyzed nationally as per geographical region and individual state. Union Territories excluding Delhi and Telangana have not been considered in this analysis.Results The CoRD in India have increased in the CRS from 66.9% in 2010 to 92 percent in 2019, a significant increase of 37.7% over 9 years (P<0.001) whereas India has not witnessed a substantial increase in the CoMeRD in MCCD which has increased from 17.1% in 2010 to only 20.6% in 2019. Among the 29 States, 18 (62%) had CoRD >95 percent in 2019, with 15 states recording 100 percent of CoRD however just 3 states (10.3%) have CoMeRD more than 50% namely Goa (100%), Manipur (67.3%) and Delhi (61.7%).Interpretation & conclusions Despite the significant progress made in CoRD in India, importance of medical certification cannot be undermined; critical differences between the States within the CRS and MCCD remain a cause of concern. Concentrated efforts to assess the strengths and weaknesses at the State level of the MCCD and CRS processes, quality of data and plausibility of information generated are needed in India.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any fundingAuthor 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 involves only openly available human data, which can be obtained from: https://censusindia.gov.in/2011-Common/mccd.html and https://censusindia.gov.in/2011-Common/mccd.htmlI 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.YesThis study involves only openly available human data, which can be obtained from: https://censusindia.gov.in/2011-Common/mccd.html and https://censusindia.gov.in/2011-Common/mccd.html