↓ Skip to main content

Who and where are the uncounted children? Inequalities in birth certificate coverage among children under five years in 94 countries using nationally representative household surveys

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
3 policy sources
twitter
11 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Who and where are the uncounted children? Inequalities in birth certificate coverage among children under five years in 94 countries using nationally representative household surveys
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12939-017-0635-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amiya Bhatia, Leonardo Zanini Ferreira, Aluísio J. D. Barros, Cesar Gomes Victora

Abstract

Birth registration, and the possession of a birth certificate as proof of registration, has long been recognized as a fundamental human right. Data from a functioning civil registration and vital statistics (CRVS) system allows governments to benefit from accurate and universal data on birth and death rates. However, access to birth certificates remains challenging and unequal in many low and middle-income countries. This paper examines wealth, urban/rural and gender inequalities in birth certificate coverage. We analyzed nationally representative household surveys from 94 countries between 2000 and 2014 using Demographic Health Surveys and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys. Birth certificate coverage among children under five was examined at the national and regional level. Absolute measures of inequality were used to measure inequalities in birth certificate coverage by wealth quintile, urban/rural residence and sex of the child. Over four million children were included in the analysis. Birth certificate coverage was over 90% in 29 countries and below 50% in 36 countries, indicating that more than half the children under five surveyed in these countries did not have a birth certificate. Eastern & Southern Africa had the lowest average birth certificate coverage (26.9%) with important variability among countries. Significant wealth inequalities in birth certificate coverage were observed in 74 countries and in most UNICEF regions, and urban/rural inequalities were present in 60 countries. Differences in birth certificate coverage between girls and boys tended to be small. We show that wealth and urban/rural inequalities in birth certificate coverage persist in most low and middle income countries, including countries where national birth certificate coverage is between 60 and 80%. Weak CRVS systems, particularly in South Asia and Africa lead rural and poor children to be systematically excluded from the benefits tied to a birth certificate, and prevent these children from being counted in national health data. Greater funding and attention is needed to strengthen CRVS systems and equity analyses should inform such efforts, especially as data needs for the Sustainable Development Goals expand. Monitoring disaggregated data on birth certificate coverage is essential to reducing inequalities in who is counted and registered. Strengthening CRVS systems can enable a child's right to identity, improve health data and promote equity.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 105 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Researcher 14 13%
Student > Master 11 10%
Lecturer 6 6%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 35 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 18 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 9%
Unspecified 6 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 6%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 42 40%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 December 2022.
All research outputs
#1,904,596
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#306
of 1,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,619
of 318,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#12
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,918 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 318,695 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.