PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Michael Chasukwa
AU  - Augustine T. Choko
AU  - Funny Muthema
AU  - Mathero M. Nkahlamba
AU  - Jacob Saikolo
AU  - Malebogo Tlhajoane
AU  - Georges Reniers
AU  - Boniface Dulani
AU  - Stéphane Helleringer
TI  - Collecting mortality data via mobile phone surveys: a non-inferiority randomized trial in Malawi
AID  - 10.1101/2022.03.02.22271441
DP  - 2022 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2022.03.02.22271441
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/03/02/2022.03.02.22271441.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/03/02/2022.03.02.22271441.full
AB  - Introduction Despite the urgent need for timely mortality data in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, mobile phone surveys rarely include questions about recent deaths. There are concerns that such questions might a) be too sensitive, b) prompt negative/adverse reactions among respondents, c) take too long to ask and/or d) generate unreliable data. We assessed the feasibility of mortality data collection during mobile phone surveys.Methods We conducted a non-inferiority trial among a random sample of mobile phone users in Malawi. Participants were allocated 3:1 to an interview about recent deaths in their family (treatment group) or about their economic activity (control group). In the treatment group, half of the respondents completed a short mortality questionnaire, focused on information necessary to calculate recent mortality rates, whereas the other half completed an extended questionnaire that also included questions about symptoms and healthcare use. The primary trial outcome was the cooperation rate. Secondary outcomes included the completion rate, self-reports of negative feelings and stated intentions to participate in future interviews. We also documented the amount of time required to collect mortality data, and we explored the quality of death reports.Results The difference in cooperation rates between treatment and control groups was 0.9 percentage points (95% CI = -2.3, 4.1), which satisfied the non-inferiority criterion. Similarly, the mortality questionnaire was non-inferior to the control questionnaire on all secondary outcomes. Collecting mortality data required approximately 2 to 4 additional minutes per reported death, depending on the inclusion of questions about symptoms and healthcare use. More than half of recent deaths elicited during mobile phone interviews had not been reported to the national civil registration system.Conclusion Including mortality-related questions in mobile phone surveys appears acceptable and feasible. It might help strengthen the surveillance of mortality trends in low-income and lower-middle-income countries with limited civil registration systems.What is already known?In many low-income and lower-middle-income countries, civil registration systems only record a fraction of all deaths. The excess mortality associated with health crises is thus not known in near real-time.Mobile phone surveys are increasingly common in low-income and lower-middle-income countries. They could help fill mortality-related data gaps, but there are concerns that asking questions about recent deaths over the phone might be too sensitive, might take too long, and/or might generate unreliable data.What are the new findings?In a randomized trial conducted with mobile phone users in Malawi, asking questions about recent deaths was not less acceptable than asking questions about economic activity and household livelihoods.Few participants reported experiencing negative feelings during the interview, and these feelings were temporary.More than half of the deaths reported during mobile phone interviews had not been previously registered with the national civil registration system.What do the new findings imply?Including questions about recent deaths in mobile phone surveys appears feasible and acceptable.It might help strengthen the surveillance of mortality trends in low-income and lower-middle-income countries with limited civil registration systems.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialAmerican Economic Association Registry of randomized Controlled Trials #0008065Funding StatementThis study was supported by funding from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD088516, PI: Helleringer), the National Institute on Aging (R03AG070660, PI: Helleringer), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-023211, PI: Reniers) and New York University-Abu Dhabi.Author 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:the study was approved by the institutional review boards of New York University Abu Dhabi (HRPP 2021 93) and the University of Malawi (UNIMAREC, P .07/21/76).I 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 authors