Methodological considerations for linking household and healthcare provider data for estimating effective coverage: a systematic review

ObjectiveTo assess existing knowledge related to methodological considerations for linking population-based surveys and health facility data to generate effective coverage estimates. Effective coverage estimates the proportion of individuals in need of an intervention who receive it with sufficient quality to achieve health benefit.DesignSystematic review of available literature.Data sourcesMedline, Carolina Population Health Center and Demographic and Health Survey publications and handsearch of related or referenced works of all articles included in full text review. The search included publications from 1 January 2000 to 29 March 2021.Eligibility criteriaPublications explicitly evaluating (1) the suitability of data, (2) the implications of the design of existing data sources and (3) the impact of choice of method for combining datasets to obtain linked coverage estimates.ResultsOf 3805 papers reviewed, 70 publications addressed relevant issues. Limited data suggest household surveys can be used to identify sources of care, but their validity in estimating intervention need was variable. Methods for collecting provider data and constructing quality indices were diverse and presented limitations. There was little empirical data supporting an association between structural, process and outcome quality. Few studies addressed the influence of the design of common data sources on linking analyses, including imprecise household geographical information system data, provider sampling design and estimate stability. The most consistent evidence suggested under certain conditions, combining data based on geographical proximity or administrative catchment (ecological linking) produced similar estimates to linking based on the specific provider utilised (exact match linking).ConclusionsLinking household and healthcare provider data can leverage existing data sources to generate more informative estimates of intervention coverage and care. However, existing evidence on methods for linking data for effective coverage estimation are variable and numerous methodological questions remain. There is need for additional research to develop evidence-based, standardised best practices for these analyses