Evaluation of methods for assigning causes of death from verbal autopsies in India

Physician-coded verbal autopsy (PCVA) is the most widely used method to determine causes of death (COD) in countries where medical certification of death is low. Computer-coded verbal autopsy (CCVA), an alternative method to PCVA for assigning the COD is considered to be efficient and cost-effective. However, the performance of CCVA as compared to PCVA is yet to be established in the Indian context.We evaluated the performance of PCVA and three CCVA methods i.e., InterVA 5, InSilico, and Tariff 2.0 on verbal autopsies done using the WHO 2016 VA tool on 2,120 reference standard cases developed from five tertiary care hospitals of Delhi. PCVA methodology involved dual independent review with adjudication, where required. Metrics to assess performance were Cause Specific Mortality Fraction (CSMF), sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), CSMF Accuracy, and Kappa statistic.In terms of the measures of the overall performance of COD assignment methods, for CSMF Accuracy, the PCVA method achieved the highest score of 0.79, followed by 0.67 for Tariff_2.0, 0.66 for Inter-VA and 0.62 for InSilicoVA. The PCVA method also achieved the highest agreement (57%) and Kappa scores (0.54). The PCVA method showed the highest sensitivity for 15 out of 20 causes of death.Our study found that the PCVA method had the best performance out of all the four COD assignment methods that were tested in our study sample. In order to improve the performance of CCVA methods, multicentric studies with larger sample sizes need to be conducted using the WHO VA tool.

[1]  C. Kabudula,et al.  Performance evaluation of machine learning and Computer Coded Verbal Autopsy (CCVA) algorithms for cause of death determination: A comparative analysis of data from rural South Africa , 2022, Frontiers in Public Health.

[2]  Norisma Idris,et al.  Clinical text classification research trends: Systematic literature review and open issues , 2019, Expert Syst. Appl..

[3]  Syed Shariyar Murtaza,et al.  Automated verbal autopsy classification: using one-against-all ensemble method and Naïve Bayes classifier , 2018, Gates open research.

[4]  A. Flaxman,et al.  The WHO 2016 verbal autopsy instrument: An international standard suitable for automated analysis by InterVA, InSilicoVA, and Tariff 2.0 , 2018, PLoS medicine.

[5]  Samuel J. Clark,et al.  Probabilistic Cause-of-Death Assignment Using Verbal Autopsies , 2014, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[6]  P. Byass,et al.  Comparison of physician-certified verbal autopsy with computer-coded verbal autopsy for cause of death assignment in hospitalized patients in low- and middle-income countries: systematic review , 2014, BMC Medicine.

[7]  Ian Riley,et al.  Using verbal autopsy to measure causes of death: the comparative performance of existing methods , 2014, BMC Medicine.

[8]  T. Williams,et al.  Validating physician-certified verbal autopsy and probabilistic modeling (InterVA) approaches to verbal autopsy interpretation using hospital causes of adult deaths , 2011, Population health metrics.

[9]  Rajendra Prasad,et al.  Population Health Metrics Research Consortium gold standard verbal autopsy validation study: design, implementation, and development of analysis datasets , 2011, Population health metrics.

[10]  Rafael Lozano,et al.  Robust metrics for assessing the performance of different verbal autopsy cause assignment methods in validation studies , 2011, Population health metrics.

[11]  P. Byass,et al.  Verbal autopsy: methods in transition. , 2010, Epidemiologic reviews.

[12]  Daniel Chandramohan,et al.  Verbal autopsy: current practices and challenges. , 2006, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[13]  R. Peto,et al.  Prospective Study of One Million Deaths in India: Rationale, Design, and Validation Results , 2005, PLoS medicine.

[14]  Alan D. Lopez,et al.  Evaluating national cause-of-death statistics: principles and application to the case of China. , 2005, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[15]  Peter Byass,et al.  A probabilistic approach to interpreting verbal autopsies: methodology and preliminary validation in Vietnam , 2003, Scandinavian journal of public health. Supplement.

[16]  D Chandramohan,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy of physician review, expert algorithms and data-derived algorithms in adult verbal autopsies. , 1999, International journal of epidemiology.

[17]  B. Reeves,et al.  A review of data-derived methods for assigning causes of death from verbal autopsy data. , 1997, International journal of epidemiology.

[18]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[19]  C. Rao,et al.  Cause of death reporting systems in India: a performance analysis. , 2001, The National medical journal of India.