Summary Table 2: Crude Death Rate (CDR) in Emergency Sites
Summary Table 2: Crude Death Rate (CDR) in emergency sites
(according to surveys conducted between January 2004 and June 2005)
| Number of emergency sites surveyed |
Severity of the situation
% (no. of sites) above standard CDR threshold >1/10,000/day |
Trends in CDR compared to the
previous year
% (no. of sites) |
Significance of
comparison |
| AFRICA |
| ANGOLA |
| 2 |
0 |
Decrease = 100% (2) |
Situation improved |
| BURUNDI |
| 1 |
0 |
- |
No previous year data |
| CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC |
| 1 |
0 |
- |
No previous year data |
| CHAD |
| 1 |
1 |
- |
No previous year data |
| DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO |
| 3 |
3 |
Increase = 100% (3) |
Situation deteriorated |
| ETHIOPIA |
| 1 |
1 |
Decrease = 100% (2) |
Situation improved |
| GUINEA |
| 1 |
0 |
- |
No previous year data |
| KENYA |
| 3 |
0 |
Decrease = 100% (1) |
Situation improved |
| LIBERIA |
| 3 |
2 |
Decrease = 100% (1) |
Situation improved |
| SOMALIA |
| 4 |
2 |
- |
No previous year data |
| SUDAN |
| 12 |
5 |
Decrease = 100% (6) |
Situation improved |
| UGANDA |
| 1 |
1 |
Decrease = 100% (1) |
Situation improved |
| ASIA |
| AFGHANISTAN |
| 3 |
0 |
Decrease = 33% (1)
Increase = 66% (2) |
Slight changes in actual rates |
| THE CARIBBEAN |
| HAITI |
| 8 |
0 |
Decrease = 33% (1)
Increase = 66% (2) |
Slight changes in actual rates |
Theoretical Background
Mortality rates are indicators that are developed from demographic principles and are commonly used to indicate disease severity, health system performance, or the impact of violent events. Mortality rates indicate the probability of dying before a certain age and require a virtual birth cohort that is followed over time and include the true population at risk of dying. Calculation of mortality rates requires more complex methods that are rarely appropriate within a humanitarian context. Confusion has arisen in the past when the humanitarian community, including this report, used the term "mortality" rates for rates calculated for "death" rates. Subsequent to technical consultations during FY 2005 through the Standardized Monitoring and Assessment of Relief and Transitions (SMART) Initiative and development of the standardized SMART methodology, the accurate terminology or CDR is now in use. CDR includes all age groups and indicates the general impact of a disaster event. It is defined as the number of people in the total population who die over a specified period of time.
CDR is the most vital, basic public health indicator of the severity of a humanitarian crisis. It is useful for assessing need, prioritizing resources, and monitoring the extent to which the relief system (with USAID as the largest donor) is meeting the needs of vulnerable populations. Thus, it measures the overall impact and performance of the relief effort. It is usually used in complex humanitarian emergencies as the response is system-wide with various sectors of the international community providing assistance.
Selection of CDR data
Mother with child at the "taxi Gare" in Bougouni, Mali.
Photo: Charles Feezel, USAID/Africa
|
Most of the CDR data were taken from surveys that also assessed nutritional status. These surveys used a probabilistic sampling methodology, complying with internationally agreed standards. The following studies were not taken into account:
- those for which the methodology was impossible to check
- those that relied on data collected using convenience sample methodologies
- those for which the methodology was not in agreement with WHO/international standard.
Data were taken from surveys that assessed the total population of specified emergency sites or area.
Severity of situation
In emergency situations, CDR is expressed as number of deaths/10,000 people/day. CDR trigger level for alert is currently set at 1/10,000/day. However, thresholds have to be used with caution and in relation to contextual analysis. Trend analysis is recommended to follow a situation: if CDR is deteriorating over time, even if not above the threshold, this indicates a worsening situation.
Comparison with the previous year
Where available, data of the emergency sites were compared to data recorded in the same area in the previous area.
Back to Top ^ | < Previous Page | Next Page >
|
