Browsing by Author "Nakafeero, Mary"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Estimating the burden of road traffic crashes in Uganda using police and health sector data sources
    (BMJ Publishing Group , British Med Assoc House, Tavistock Square, London, England, Wc1h 9jr, 2021) Maring Muni, Kennedy; Ningwa, Albert; Osuret, Jimmy; Zziwa Bayiga, Esther; Namatovu, Stellah; Biribawa, Claire; Nakafeero, Mary; Mutto, Milton; Guwatudde, David; Kyamanywa, Patrick Edrin; Kobusingye, Olive
    Background In many low-income countries, estimates of road injury burden are derived from police reports, and may not represent the complete picture of the burden in these countries. As a result, WHO and the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries and Risk Factors Project often use complex models to generate country-specific estimates. Although such estimates inform prevention targets, they may be limited by the incompleteness of the data and the assumptions used in the models. In this crosssectional study, we provide an alternative approach to estimating road traffic injury burden for Uganda for the year 2016 using data from multiple data sources (the police, health facilities and mortuaries). Methods A digitised data collection tool was used to extract crash and injury information from files in 32 police stations, 31 health facilities and 4 mortuaries in Uganda. We estimated crash and injury burden using weights generated as inverse of the product of the probabilities of selection of police regions and stations. Results We estimated that 25 729 crashes occurred on Ugandan roads in 2016, involving 59 077 individuals with 7558 fatalities. This is more than twice the number of fatalities reported by the police for 2016 (3502) but lower than the estimate from the 2018 Global Status Report (12 036). Pedestrians accounted for the greatest proportion of the fatalities 2455 (32.5%), followed by motorcyclists 1357 (18%). Conclusions Using both police and health sector data gives more robust estimates for the road traffic burden in Uganda than using either source alone.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Prevalence, regional distribution, and determinants of infertility in Uganda between 2006 and 2016: analysis of three demographic and health surveys
    (2024) Zaake, Daniel; Amongin, Dinah; Beňová, Lenka; Kiwanuka, N. Suzanne; Nalwadda, K, Christine; Nakafeero, Mary; Riese, Sara; Kayiira, Anthony; Asefa, Anteneh
    Low- and middle-income countries, particularly in the African region in-country distribution and determinants of infertility are understudied. In this study, we aimed to estimate the prevalence, regional distribution, and determinants of infertility in Uganda to inform programming. We estimated the prevalence of primary and secondary infertility among women aged 20-49 years using data from the three rounds of the Uganda Demographic and Health Survey 2006, 2011, and 2016, and compared the differences across geographic regions. We pooled data sets for all three years and conducted logistic regression to identify factors associated with infertility. We included 16,537 women aged 20-49 years for analysis of primary infertility and 12,628 for secondary infertility. The overall prevalence of infertility (pooled across the three surveys was 6.4%. The prevalence of primary infertility was 1.4% (95% Confidence interval, CI=1.0-1.8), 0.7% (95% CI=0.5-1.0) and 0.8% (95% CI=0.6-1.0) in 2006, 2011 and 2016, respectively. The prevalence of secondary infertility was 7.4% (95% CI=6.5-8.4), 6.9% (95% CI=5.9-8.0) and 7.1% (95% CI=6.4-7.9) in 2006, 2011, and 2016 respectively. The prevalence of primary infertility was similar across regions. Secondary infertility was highest in the Central (7.9%, 95% CI= 6.1-10.3, in 2016) and Northern regions (7.4%, 95% CI=6.1-8.9, in 2016). In all survey years, women with higher education had lower odds of secondary infertility compared to women with no education (adjusted odds ratio, aOR=0.54, 95% CI=0.35-0.83; P < 0.001). Our results suggest that the prevalence of primary infertility is similar across regions, whereas secondary infertility varies by region, with higher prevalence in Central and Northern regions. More research is required to understand the drivers behind the variation of secondary infertility across regions to inform policy and decision making