About this Journal Publication ethics Editorial Board Editorial Council Editorial Office For the Authors Contacts
English

News feeds

Journal in Databases

eLIBRARY.RU - НАУЧНАЯ ЭЛЕКТРОННАЯ БИБЛИОТЕКА

Google Scholar

Google Scholar

For authors' attention

Publication is free of charge

In aims to provide interconnection of publications in international scientific journals using Digital Object Identification - DOI, our editorial office incorporated the journal "Social aspects of population health" into international reference system CrossRef.

Since 2016 DOI will be assigned to all scientific articles published in our journal free of charge.

Also DOI will be assigned to all articles published in 2014 and 2015 free of charge as well
Main arrow Archive of previous Issues arrow №6 2012 (28) arrow Infantile mortality in Russia: the issue of verified registration
Infantile mortality in Russia: the issue of verified registration Print
Wednesday, 09 January 2013

L.P. Sukhanova1, N.N. Bushmelyova2, Z.Kh. Sorokina3
1Federal Research Institute for Health Organization and Informatics of Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow
2State Medical Academy of the city of Izhevsk, city of Izhevsk
3Academician V.Yi.Kulakov Memorial Research Center for obstetrics, gynecology and perinatal studies

Summary. Evaluation of recent two decades tendencies in infantile mortality shows rather a favorable situation when based on indicators from official statistics: the rates of overall infantile mortality has decreased from 17.8 deaths upon 1000 newborns in 1991 to 7.4 (that is 2.4-foldly) in 2011, neonatal mortality has decreased from 11.0 ‰ in 1991 to 4.2 ‰ in 2011 (61.8% less in 2011), the mortality of infants of first week after birth has decreased from 8.9‰ to 2.8‰ (68.5% less in 2011‰) – mainly contributing to neonatal mortality improved rates, post-neonatal mortality has decreased from 6.8 in 1991 to 3.3 in 2011 (51.5% less in 2011). Interestingly enough, the fastest rates of diminishment of the infantile mortality were pertaining to the second decade of the period studied – from 15.3 in 2000 to 7.4 in 2011.

Noteworthy, infantile mortality is generally considered to be a rather steady and persistent demographic indicator not quite susceptible to drastic or just rapid changes, thus, a strong doubt arises as to the verified nature of these statistical data. Analysis of the dynamics of these changes, of the age structure of dead-borns and the structure of newborns’ deaths along body (at-birth) weight categories only but gave growth to these doubts.

A peculiar feature of infantile mortality age structure in Russia presented in official statistics was the steady diminishment of the proportion of neonatal mortality with simultaneous growth of post-neonatal mortality (the so called ageing of infantile mortality), while in the EU, for instance, the tendencies are quite opposite to these ones: more late fatalities are not so prominent in comparison, and the overall decreased infantile mortality here comes mainly from the decreased post-neonatal mortality.

The whole nuisance with Russian peculiar features in the dynamics of the statistically presented infantile mortality could be accounted for merely by factual under-registration of dead infants.

Two evasion pathways involved in under-calculated indicators of infantile mortality in Russia were identified in this study: first, the statistical transfer of a infant dead in early neonatal period to the category of stillborn, which was quite possible before the new regulations for the official statistics on this point; secondly, entering the fact of dead infant (or stillborn) into the pool of fetus phenomena specifically including miscarriage with no official registration (on the ground that it was a fetus phenomenon) which was also quite possible before the new regulations of 2011 for the official statistics on that point. Peculiar enough was that before these new regulations, the very discontinuation of pregnancy prior to 27 full weeks of gestation had been often considered as a miscarriage only.

First, the structural discrepancies in the statistical pool between the number of life-born and still-born infants are quite obvious from the official statistics presentations, and these discrepancies were due to unjustified transfer of infants dead in early neonatal period to a stillborn category. Secondly, a mythical ablation of a whole category of newborns (and that was the category with the weight-at-birth of 1000-1499 g) not rarely occurring in statistics of registered infantile mortality, indicated the existence of great lacunae in this respect. These insufficiencies to a great extent were due to referring dead infants to unborn fetes not intended for official registration as dead-borns.

The first evasion pathway when a life-born, then dead infant was entered into the category of a stillborn was being very clearly identified judging from not rare statistical absence or unrealistically small numbers of the infants dead in the primary 24 hours after birth.

Conclusions: Infantile mortality, or more specifically neonatal mortality, was artificially under-estimated and under-calculated in Russia in the past two decades, mainly due to sharp under-registration - through various evasion pathways - of the infants dead in the PB (post-birth) neonatal period (0-6 days after birth). Post-neonatal losses has proved to be of more verified character compared to neonatal mortality presented by official statistics. Moreover, numerical relationship between neonatal and post-neonatal losses in the official statistics of the EU has proved to be much more appropriate, presuming the possible implementation of the established there proportion for the correction of the biased statistics in our country - for the indicators of early neonatal (1st day) and post-birth (0-6 days) neonatal mortality, in particular.

This presumed correction could be done on the way of artificially reconstructed infantile mortality rates with specified consideration to the officially registered post-neonatal mortality as much more reliable in this context – with due correction - on this basis - of early neonatal figures that were, most probably, unreliable ones.

Keywords. Infantile mortality, neonatal mortality, verification of registered newborns mortality, infants of 1st year after birth.

 

References

  1. Albitskiy V.Yu., Nikolskaya L.A., Abrosimova M.Yu. Fetoinfantilnyye poteri [Fetoinfant losses]. Kazan. 1997. 168 p.
  2. Baranov A.A., Albitskiy V.Yu. Smertnost detskogo naseleniya Rossii [Mortality of children population in Russia]. Moscow: Literra; 2007. 328 p.
  3. Baranov A.A., Ignatyeva R.K. Problema nedoucheta perinatalnykh poter [The problem of undercount of perinatal losses]. In: Smertnost detskogo naseleniya Rossii. Seriya "Sotsialnaya pediatriya". Vypusk 1. Moscow: Literra; 2007. P. 45-59.
  4. Goryainova I.L. Mediko-sotsialnyye problemy mladencheskoy smertnosti, puti eye snizheniya i profilaktiki [Health and social problems of infant mortality, the ways for its reduction and prevention]. [PhD. Thesis]. Moscow. 2010. 24 p.
  5. Prikaz Minzdravsotsrazvitiya Rossii №1687 ot 27 dekabrya 2011g. (zaregistrirovan v Minyuste RF 15 marta 2012 g. №23490) "O meditsinskikh kriteriyakh rozhdeniya, forme dokumenta o rozhdenii i poryadke eye vydachi" ["On health criteria of the childbirth, the form of the birth certificate and the order of its registration", the Regulation of the MoH&SD of the RF №1687 of December 27 2011]. [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2012 Nov 12]. Available from: http://www.minzdravsoc.ru/docs/mzsr/orders/1245
  6. Prikaz Ministerstva zdravookhraneniya RF ot 04 dekabrya 1992 g. №318 "O perekhode na rekomendovannyye Vsemirnoy Organizatsiyey Zdravookhraneniya kriterii zhivorozhdeniya i mertvorozhdeniya". [On implementation of the live birth and dead birth criteria recommended by the World Health Organization”, the Regulation of the MoH&SD of the RF of December 04 1992 №318] [Internet]. 1992 [cited 2012 Nov 12]. Available from: http://base.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.cgi?req=doc;base=MED;n=1971
  7. Sorokina Z.Kh. Problemy perekhoda otechestvennogo zdravookhraneniya na mezhdunarodnyye kriterii registratsii detey ekstremalnoy massy tela [The problem of implementation of international criteria for registration of newborns with an extreme birth weight in domestic healthcare]. Problemy upravleniya zdravookhraneniyem 2010;(5):35-40.
  8. Starodubov V.I., Sukhanova L.P., Sychenkov Yu.G. Reproduktivnyye poteri kak mediko-sotsialnaya problema demograficheskogo razvitiya Rossii [Reproductive losses as a health and social problem of the demographic development of Russia]. Sotsialnyye aspekty zdorovya naseleniya [Online Scientific Journal]. 2011;(6). [cited 2012 Oct 22]. Available from: http://vestnik.mednet.ru/content/view/367/27/lang,ru/
  9. Starodubov V.I., Tsybulskaya I.S., Sukhanova L.P. Okhrana zdorovya materi i rebenka kak prioritetnaya problema sovremennoy Rossii [Maternal and child’s health protection as a priority problem of the present-day Russia]. Sovremennyye meditsinskiye tekhnologii 2009;(2):11-16.
  10. Sukhanova L.P. Optimizatsiya perinatalnoy pomoshchi kak vazhneyshiy faktor sokhraneniya zdorovya naseleniya Rossii [Optimization of the perinatal care as an important factor for protection of the Russian population health. [PhD. Dissertation]. Moscow. 2006. 335 p.
  11. Sukhanova L.P., Sklyar M.S. Detskaya i perinatalnaya smertnost v Rossii: tendentsii, struktura, faktory riska [Infant and perinatal mortality in Russia: tendencies, structure, and risk factors]. Sotsialnyye aspekty zdorovya naseleniya [Online Scientific Journal]. 2007;(4) [cited 2012 Nov 12]. Available from: http://vestnik.mednet.ru/content/view/46/30/
  12. Ukaz Prezidenta RF № 825 ot 28 iyunya 2007g. (v redaktsii ot 28.04.2008 i 13.05.2010-№579) "Ob otsenke effektivnosti deyatelnosti organov ispolnitelnoy vlasti subyektov RF" ["On assessment of efficiency of executive bodies activity in the subjects of the Russian Federation", the Regulation of the President of the RF № 825 of June 28, 2007]. [Internet]. 2007 [cited 2012 Nov 12]. Available from: http://www.referent.ru/1/120081
  13. Blondel B., Breart G. Mortalite foeto-infantile. Evolution, causes et methods d’analise. Encycl. Med. Chir. (Paris-Franct). Pediatrie 1990;(12):34-56.
  14. Ewerbeck H. Neue Definition bei der Saulingssterblichkeit. Monatsschrift fur Kinderheilkunde 1977;125(6):674.
  15. Dellaportas G. J. Correlation-based estimation of early infant mortality. Health Services Reports 1972;87(3):275-281.
  16. Mathews TJ, MacDorman MF. Infant mortality statistics from the 2007 period linked birth/infant death data set. National vital statistics reports. [Internet]. 2011;59(6). [cited 2012 Nov 12]. Available from: www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr59/nvsr59_06.pdf.

Views: 22270

Comments (4)
1. 09-07-2017 17:55
Предположения + домыслы + подтасовки = враньё. 
Сравнение со средними показателями напоминает среднюю температуру по больнице. 
Покажите аналогичные данные по отдельным "правильным" странам, например: Франции, Японии, Норвегии, Дании и т.д. У всех проценты прыгают гораздо больше в сравнении с Россией. 
Также в статье содержатся обвинения в массовых преступлениях. Не удивлюсь, если "работу" оплатила нко.
Written by Victor ( This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it ) (Guest)
2. 05-08-2015 04:26
Прочитала статью полностью. Вопрос: как наказывают чиновников от здравоохранения за фальсификацию показателей? Или это государственный стиль?
Written by любовь (lreshetnik@ yandex.ru) (Guest)
3. 31-03-2014 02:29
Сдается мне что принятие новых методик подсчета направлено на невозможность проведения нормального учета, и как следствие искажения реальных выводов.
Written by Олег ( This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it ) (Guest)
4. 17-02-2013 20:02
Прочитал статью целиком. Много думал... :-) 
 
У меня вопрос к авторам статьи: реконструированные показатели МС за 1995-2010 гг. охватывают только те случаи младенческой смертности, которые подпадают под старые критерии учёта (масса тела 1000 г, длина 35 см, 28 неделя беременности)? По способу реконструкции от "базового" (официального) показателя МС можно сделать вывод, что реконструированные показатели МС за 1995-2010 гг необходимо дополнительно "реконструировать", чтобы они соответствовали новой системе учёта, соответствующей критериям ВОЗ и Евросоюза. В таком случае, коэффициенты МС будут выше тех, которые указаны в Табл.6. 
 
Ещё один вопрос: почему для 2011 года показатель МС рассчитан по новой системе учёта (8,56‰ вместо 7,33‰), но его реконструкция по методу, предложенному авторами статьи, не проведена? 
 
Наконец, самый главный вопрос — а что с 2012 годом? По предварительным данным, коэффициент МС, рассчитанный по новой методике, составил 8,7‰. Означает ли это, что в 2012 году младенческая смертность повысилась в сравнении с 2011 годом? Или же в ушедшем году уровень фальсификаций в сравнении с прошлым годом снизился, и динамика МС продолжила снижаться?
Written by Сергей ( This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it ) (Guest)

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed.
  • Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button.
  • Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Comment:

Code:* Code

Last Updated ( Wednesday, 30 January 2013 )
< Prev   Next >
home contact search contact search