Assessing courtesy reporting bias in facility-based surveys on person-centred maternity care: evidence from urban informal settlements in Nairobi and Lusaka.

IF 4.5 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Safia S Jiwani, Martin Kavao Mutua, Choolwe Jacobs, Mwiche Musukuma, Anne Njeri, Godfrey Adero, Dennis Ngosa, Amanuel Abajobir, Cheikh Mbacké Faye, Ties Boerma, Agbessi Amouzou
{"title":"Assessing courtesy reporting bias in facility-based surveys on person-centred maternity care: evidence from urban informal settlements in Nairobi and Lusaka.","authors":"Safia S Jiwani, Martin Kavao Mutua, Choolwe Jacobs, Mwiche Musukuma, Anne Njeri, Godfrey Adero, Dennis Ngosa, Amanuel Abajobir, Cheikh Mbacké Faye, Ties Boerma, Agbessi Amouzou","doi":"10.7189/jogh.15.04090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Experience of care is typically measured through client exit surveys administered in the facility. Evidence suggests that such measures suffer from courtesy reporting bias whereby respondents do not accurately report on their experiences while in the facility. We explored the presence of courtesy bias by comparing women's reported experience of person-centred maternity care (PCMC) from facility-based client exit surveys to mobile phone-based surveys out of the facility in Nairobi and Lusaka's urban informal settlements.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We randomly and independently sampled women in the facilities for either a facility-based survey (n = 233 in Lusaka and n = 112 in Nairobi) or a mobile phone-based survey (n = 203 in Lusaka and n = 300 in Nairobi) within one to two weeks of facility discharge. The questionnaire included a validated PCMC scale. After adjusting for differences in women's characteristics across groups, we compared PCMC scores between facility and phone-based samples. We ran multilevel linear regression models to assess PCMC by survey modality in each city.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In both cities, over 70.0% of women were aged 20-34 years and were married, at least two thirds had secondary education, and over 95.0% were unaccompanied during labour/delivery. The overall PCMC score was 69.3% among women surveyed on the phone compared to 70.2% among those surveyed in the facility in Nairobi. In Lusaka, it was 57.5% on the phone compared to 56.8% in-facility. We found no statistically significant differences in PCMC scores between survey modalities in both cities, after adjusting for differences in women's characteristics.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We did not detect significant courtesy reporting bias in PCMC in facility-based client exit surveys in the context of urban informal settlements in Nairobi and Lusaka. Experience of PCMC can be measured through in-facility client exit surveys or mobile phone surveys. However, it is critical to address challenges related to a mobile phone-based approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":48734,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Health","volume":"15 ","pages":"04090"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11949514/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.15.04090","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Experience of care is typically measured through client exit surveys administered in the facility. Evidence suggests that such measures suffer from courtesy reporting bias whereby respondents do not accurately report on their experiences while in the facility. We explored the presence of courtesy bias by comparing women's reported experience of person-centred maternity care (PCMC) from facility-based client exit surveys to mobile phone-based surveys out of the facility in Nairobi and Lusaka's urban informal settlements.

Methods: We randomly and independently sampled women in the facilities for either a facility-based survey (n = 233 in Lusaka and n = 112 in Nairobi) or a mobile phone-based survey (n = 203 in Lusaka and n = 300 in Nairobi) within one to two weeks of facility discharge. The questionnaire included a validated PCMC scale. After adjusting for differences in women's characteristics across groups, we compared PCMC scores between facility and phone-based samples. We ran multilevel linear regression models to assess PCMC by survey modality in each city.

Results: In both cities, over 70.0% of women were aged 20-34 years and were married, at least two thirds had secondary education, and over 95.0% were unaccompanied during labour/delivery. The overall PCMC score was 69.3% among women surveyed on the phone compared to 70.2% among those surveyed in the facility in Nairobi. In Lusaka, it was 57.5% on the phone compared to 56.8% in-facility. We found no statistically significant differences in PCMC scores between survey modalities in both cities, after adjusting for differences in women's characteristics.

Conclusions: We did not detect significant courtesy reporting bias in PCMC in facility-based client exit surveys in the context of urban informal settlements in Nairobi and Lusaka. Experience of PCMC can be measured through in-facility client exit surveys or mobile phone surveys. However, it is critical to address challenges related to a mobile phone-based approach.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Global Health
Journal of Global Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.80%
发文量
240
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Global Health is a peer-reviewed journal published by the Edinburgh University Global Health Society, a not-for-profit organization registered in the UK. We publish editorials, news, viewpoints, original research and review articles in two issues per year.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信