Measuring Intermediary Determinants of Early Childhood Health: A Composite Index Comparing Colombian Departments

In recent years there has been growing interest in composite indicators as an efficient tool of analysis and a method of prioritizing policies. This paper presents a composite index of intermediary determinants of child health using a multivariate statistical approach. The index shows how specific determinants of child health vary across Colombian departments (administrative subdivisions). We used data collected from the 2010 Colombian Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) for 32 departments and the capital city, Bogotá. Adapting the conceptual framework of Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH), five dimensions related to child health are represented in the index: material circumstances, behavioural factors, psychosocial factors, biological factors and the health system. In order to generate the weight of the variables, and taking into account the discrete nature of the data, principal component analysis (PCA) using polychoric correlations was employed in constructing the index. From this method five principal components were selected. The index was estimated using a weighted average of the retained components. A hierarchical cluster analysis was also carried out. The results show that the biggest differences in intermediary determinants of child health are associated with health care before and during delivery.

Measuring early childhood health : a composite index comparing Colombian departments

This paper presents a composite index of early childhood health using a multivariate statistical approach. The index shows how child health varies across Colombian departments, -administrative subdivisions-. In recent years there has been growing interest in composite indicators as an efficient analysis tool and a way of prioritizing policies. These indicators not only enable multi-dimensional phenomena to be simplified but also make it easier to measure, visualize, monitor and compare a country’s performance in particular issues. We used data collected from the Colombian Demographic and Health Survey, DHS, for 32 departments and the capital city, Bogotá, in 2005 and 2010. The variables included in the index provide a measure of three dimensions related to child health: health status, health determinants and the health system. In order to generate the weight of the variables and take into account the discrete nature of the data, we employed a principal component analysis, PCA, using polychoric correlation. From this method, five principal components were selected. The index was estimated using a weighted average of the components retained. A hierarchical cluster analysis was also carried out. We observed that the departments ranking in the lowest positions are located on the Colombian periphery. They are departments with low per capita incomes and they present critical social indicators. The results suggest that the regional disparities in child health may be associated with differences in parental characteristics, household conditions and economic development levels, which makes clear the importance of context in the study of child health in Colombia.

Classification models for neurocognitive impairment in HIV infection based on demographic and clinical variables

Objective: We used demographic and clinical data to design practical classification models for prediction of neurocognitive impairment (NCI) in people with HIV infection. Methods: The study population comprised 331 HIV-infected patients with available demographic, clinical, and neurocognitive data collected using a comprehensive battery of neuropsychological tests. Classification and regression trees (CART) were developed to btain detailed and reliable models to predict NCI. Following a practical clinical approach, NCI was considered the main variable for study outcomes, and analyses were performed separately in treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients. Results: The study sample comprised 52 treatment-naïve and 279 experienced patients. In the first group, the variables identified as better predictors of NCI were CD4 cell count and age (correct classification [CC]: 79.6%, 3 final nodes). In treatment-experienced patients, the variables most closely related to NCI were years of education, nadir CD4 cell count, central nervous system penetration-effectiveness score, age, employment status, and confounding comorbidities (CC: 82.1%, 7 final nodes). In patients with an undetectable viral load and no comorbidities, we obtained a fairly accurate model in which the main variables were nadir CD4 cell count, current CD4 cell count, time on current treatment, and past highest viral load (CC: 88%, 6 final nodes). Conclusion: Practical classification models to predict NCI in HIV infection can be obtained using demographic and clinical variables. An approach based on CART analyses may facilitate screening for HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders and complement clinical information about risk and protective factors for NCI in HIV-infected patients.

Setting priorities in clinical and health services research: Properties of an adapted and updated method

Objectives: The objectives of this study is to review the set of criteria of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) for priority-setting in research with addition of new criteria if necessary, and to develop and evaluate the reliability and validity of the final priority score. Methods: Based on the evaluation of 199 research topics, forty-five experts identified additional criteria for priority-setting, rated their relevance, and ranked and weighted them in a three-round modified Delphi technique. A final priority score was developed and evaluated. Internal consistency, test–retest and inter-rater reliability were assessed. Correlation with experts’ overall qualitative topic ratings were assessed as an approximation to validity. Results: All seven original IOM criteria were considered relevant and two new criteria were added (“potential for translation into practice”, and “need for knowledge”). Final ranks and relative weights differed from those of the original IOM criteria: “research impact on health outcomes” was considered the most important criterion (4.23), as opposed to “burden of disease” (3.92). Cronbach’s alpha (0.75) and test–retest stability (interclass correlation coefficient = 0.66) for the final set of criteria were acceptable. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for overall assessment of priority was 0.66. Conclusions: A reliable instrument for prioritizing topics in clinical and health services research has been developed. Further evaluation of its validity and impact on selecting research topics is required