BackgroundEvidence suggests that in spite of some adolescents being sexually active, many parents do not discuss sex-related issues with them due to lack of age-appropriate respectful vocabulary and skills. The likelihood of parent-adolescent communication improving sexual and reproductive health outcomes appears plausible. The desire to understand parent-adolescent communication and how to improve it for promotion of healthy sexual behaviours inspired this research. The paper is meant to describe perceptions of adolescents, parents and school administrators about parent-adolescent communication on sexual issues; describe the content of such communication and identify factors that influence this communication.MethodsThe study was done among two urban and two rural secondary school students in their second year of education. Data were collected from 11 focus group discussions and 10 key Informants Interviews. Data management, analysis and interpretation followed thematic analysis principles. Illuminating verbatim quotations are used to illustrate findings.ResultsParental warmth and acceptability of children was perceived by parents to be foundational for a healthy adolescent- parent communication. Perceptions of adolescents tended to point to more open and frequent communication with mothers than fathers and to cordial relationships with mothers. Fathers were perceived by adolescents to be strict, intimidating, unapproachable and unavailable. While adolescents tended to generally discuss sexual issues with mothers, male adolescents communicated less with anyone on sex, relationships and condoms. Much of the parent-adolescent communication was perceived to focus on sexually transmitted infections and body changes. Discussions of sex and dating with adolescents were perceived to be rare. Common triggers of sexuality discussions with female adolescents were; onset of menstruation and perceived abortion in the neighbourhood. Discussion with male adolescents, if it occurred was perceived to be triggered by parental suspicion of having female ‘friends’ or coming home late. Peers at school and mass media were perceived to the main source of sexuality information.ConclusionsCommunication on sexuality issues between parents and their adolescent children was infrequent and critical elements like sex and specifics of protection against undesirable sexual behaviour consequences were avoided. Peers, schools and mass media should be creatively harnessed to improve parent-adolescent communication about sexuality issues.

Background Under-five and maternal mortality were halved in the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) era, with slower reductions for 2.6 million neonatal deaths and 2.6 million stillbirths. The Every Newborn Action Plan aims to accelerate progress towards national targets, and includes an ambitious Measurement Improvement Roadmap. Population-based household surveys, notably Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys, are major sources of population-level data on child mortality in countries with weaker civil registration and vital statistics systems, where over two-thirds of global child deaths occur. To estimate neonatal/child mortality and pregnancy outcomes (stillbirths, miscarriages, birthweight, gestational age) the most common direct methods are: (1) the standard DHS-7 with Full Birth History with additional questions on pregnancy losses in the past 5 years (FBH + ) or (2) a Full Pregnancy History (FPH). No direct comparison of these two methods has been undertaken, although descriptive analyses suggest that the FBH + may underestimate mortality rates particularly for stillbirths. Methods This is the protocol paper for the Every Newborn-INDEPTH study (INDEPTH Network, International Network for the Demographic Evaluation of Populations and their Health Every Newborn, Every Newborn Action Plan), aiming to undertake a randomised comparison of FBH + and FPH to measure pregnancy outcomes in a household survey in five selected INDEPTH Network sites in Africa and South Asia (Bandim in urban and rural Guinea-Bissau; Dabat in Ethiopia; IgangaMayuge in Uganda; Kintampo in Ghana; Matlab in Bangladesh). The survey will reach >68 000 pregnancies to assess if there is ≥15% difference in stillbirth rates. Additional questions will capture birthweight, gestational age, birth/death certification, termination of pregnancy and fertility intentions. The World Bank’s Survey Solutions platform will be tailored for data collection, including recording paradata to evaluate timing. A mixed methods assessment of barriers and enablers to reporting of pregnancy and adverse pregnancy outcomes will be undertaken. Conclusions This large-scale study is the first randomised comparison of these two methods to capture pregnancy outcomes. Results are expected to inform the evidence base for survey methodology, especially in DHS, regarding capture of stillbirths and other outcomes, notably neonatal deaths, abortions (spontaneous and induced), birthweight and gestational age. In addition, this study will inform strategies to improve health and demographic surveillance capture of neonatal/child mortality and pregnancy outcomes.

Background An estimated 5·1 million stillbirths and neonatal deaths occur annually. Household surveys, most notably the Demographic and Health Survey (DHS), run in more than 90 countries and are the main data source from the highest burden regions, but data-quality concerns remain. We aimed to compare two questionnaires: a full birth history module with additional questions on pregnancy losses (FBH+; the current DHS standard) and a full pregnancy history module (FPH), which collects information on all livebirths, stillbirths, miscarriages, and neonatal deaths. Methods Women residing in five Health and Demographic Surveillance System sites within the INDEPTH Network (Bandim in Guinea-Bissau, Dabat in Ethiopia, IgangaMayuge in Uganda, Matlab in Bangladesh, and Kintampo inGhana) were randomly assigned (individually) to be interviewed using either FBH+ or FPH between July 28, 2017, and Aug 13, 2018. The primary outcomes were stillbirths and neonatal deaths in the 5 years before the survey interview (measured by stillbirth rate [SBR] and neonatal mortality rate [NMR]) and mean time taken to complete the maternity history section of the questionnaire. We also assessed between-site heterogeneity. This study is registered with the Research Registry, 4720.Findings 69 176 women were allocated to be interviewed by either FBH+ (n=34 805) or FPH (n=34 371). The mean time taken to complete FPH (10·5 min) was longer than for FBH+ (9·1 min; p<0·0001). Using FPH, the estimated SBR was 17·4 per 1000 total births, 21% (95% CI -10 to 62) higher than with FBH+ (15·2 per 1000 total births; p=0·20) in the 5 years preceding the survey interview. There was strong evidence of between-site heterogeneity (I²=80·9%; p<0·0001), with SBR higher for FPH than for FBH+ in four of five sites. The estimated NMR did not differ between modules (FPH 25·1 per 1000 livebirths vs FBH+ 25·4 per 1000 livebirths), with no evidence of betweensite heterogeneity (I²=0·7%; p=0·40).Interpretation FPH takes an average of 1·4 min longer to complete than does FBH+, but has the potential to increase reporting of stillbirths in high burden contexts. The between-site heterogeneity we found might reflect variations in interviewer training and survey implementation, emphasising the importance of interviewer skills, training, and consistent implementation in data quality.

Objectives We compared pregnancy identification methods and outcome capture across 31 Health Demographic Surveillance System (HDSS) sites in 14 countries in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. Methods From 2009 to 2014, details on the sites and surveillance systems including frequency of update rounds, characteristics of enumerators and interviewers, acceptable respondents were collected and compared across sites. Results The 31 HDSS had a combined population of over 2,905,602 with 165,820 births for the period. Stillbirth rate ranged from 1.9 to 42.6 deaths per 1000 total births and the neonatal mortality rate from 2.6 to 41.6 per 1000 live births. Three quarters (75.3%) of recorded neonatal deaths occurred in the first week of life. The proportion of infant deaths that occurred in the neonatal period ranged from 8 to 83%, with a median of 53%. Sites that registered pregnancies upon locating a live baby in the routine household surveillance round had lower recorded mortality rates. Conclusions Increased attention and standardization of pregnancy surveillance and the time of birth will improve data collection and provide platforms for evaluations and availability of data for decision-making with implications for national planning. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00038-019-01241-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Risks of neonatal death, stillbirth and miscarriage are highest in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where data has most gaps and estimates rely on household surveys, dependent on women reporting these events. Underreporting of pregnancy and adverse pregnancy outcomes (APOs) is common, but few studies have investigated barriers to reporting these in LMICs. The EN-INDEPTH multi-country study applied qualitative approaches to explore barriers and enablers to reporting pregnancy and APOs in surveys, including individual, community, cultural and interview level factors. Methods The study was conducted in five Health and Demographic Surveillance System sites in Guinea-Bissau, Ethiopia, Uganda, Bangladesh and Ghana. Using an interpretative paradigm and phenomenology methodology, 28 focus group discussions were conducted with 82 EN-INDEPTH survey interviewers and supervisors and 172 women between February and August 2018. Thematic analysis was guided by an a priori codebook. Results Survey interview processes influenced reporting of pregnancy and APOs. Women found questions about APOs intrusive and of unclear relevance. Across all sites, sociocultural and spiritual beliefs were major barriers to women reporting pregnancy, due to fear that harm would come to their baby. We identified several factors affecting reporting of APOs including reluctance to speak about sad memories and variation in recognition of the baby’s value, especially for APOs at earlier gestation. Overlaps in local understanding and terminology for APOs may also contribute to misreporting, for example between miscarriages and stillbirths. Interviewers’ skills and training were the keys to enabling respondents to open up, as was privacy during interviews. Conclusion Sociocultural beliefs and psycho-social impacts of APOs play a large part in underreporting these events. Interviewers’ skills, careful tool development and translation are the keys to obtaining accurate information. Reporting could be improved with clearer explanations of survey purpose and benefits to respondents and enhanced interviewer training on probing, building rapport and empathy.