Associations between type of blood collection, analytical approach, mean haemoglobin and anaemia prevalence in population-based surveys: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Autor:	Stevens GA; Independent Researcher, Los Angeles, California, USA.; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Imperial College London, London, UK., Flores-Urrutia MC; Department of Nutrition and Food Safety, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland., Rogers LM; Department of Nutrition and Food Safety, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland., Paciorek CJ; Department of Statistics, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA., Rohner F; GroundWork, Fläsch, Switzerland., Namaste S; The DHS Program, ICF International, Rockville, Maryland, USA., Wirth JP; GroundWork, Fläsch, Switzerland.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Journal of global health [J Glob Health] 2022 Nov 23; Vol. 12, pp. 04088. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Nov 23.
DOI:	10.7189/jogh.12.04088
Abstrakt:	Background: Previous studies have observed that haemoglobin concentrations can be affected by type of blood collection, analysis methods and device, and that near-in-time population-based surveys report substantially different anaemia prevalence. We investigated whether differences in mean haemoglobin or prevalence of anaemia between near-in-time surveys of the same population were associated with differences in type of blood collection or analytic approach to haemoglobin measurement. Methods: We systematically identified pairs of population-based surveys that measured haemoglobin in the same population of women of reproductive age (WRA) or preschool-aged children (PSC). Surveys were matched on geographic coverage, urban/rural place of residence, inclusion of pregnant women, time of data collection (within 18 months), and, to the extent feasible, age range. Differences in anaemia prevalence were presented graphically. Random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression of difference in mean haemoglobin were carried out, with subgroups defined by comparison of type of blood collection and analytic approach within each survey pair. Results: We included 23 survey pairs from 17 countries for PSC and 17 survey pairs from 11 countries for WRA. Meta-regression indicates that surveys measuring haemoglobin with HemoCue® Hb 301 found higher haemoglobin concentrations than near-in-time surveys using HemoCue® Hb 201+ in non-pregnant women ((NPW); 5.8 g/L (95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.2-8.3) mean difference, n = 5 pairs) and PSC (4.3 g/L (1.4-7.2), n = 6). Surveys collecting venous blood found higher haemoglobin concentrations than near-in-time surveys collecting capillary blood in PSC (3.8 g/L (0.8-6.7), n = 8), but not NPW (0.4 g/L (-1.9-2.8), n = 9). Conclusions: Because this study is observational, differences in haemoglobin concentrations in near-in-time surveys may be caused by other factors associated with choice of analytic approach or type of blood collected. The source or sources of differences should be clarified to improve use of surveys to prioritize and evaluate public health programs. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42022296553. Competing Interests: Disclosure of interest: The authors completed the ICMJE Disclosure of Interest Form (available upon request from the corresponding author) and declare the following activities and relationships: GAS, CJP, FR, and JPW report that WHO supported their work on this study. MCFU and LMR report institutional funding for this research from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and institutional grants for other work from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, USAID, Iodine Global Network. LMR reports membership of the board of Iodine Global Network, board of the Global Alliance for Vitamin A, and secretariat of the Alliance for Anaemia Actions. CJP reports holding Pfizer stock. SN reports a grant from USAID through The DHS Program. (Copyright © 2022 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu