There has been mixed progress in reducing world under-5 mortality. Figures released by UNICEF, based on the work of the Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation (IGME)*, show that the overall average annual rate of reduction (AARR) is much higher from 2000-2008 than it was 1990-2000. However, the rate of decline is still grossly insufficient for the world overall to achieve Millennium Development Goal 4**. But the authors highlight that the effect of interventions such as various vaccination programmes and insecticide-treated bednets, may have happened too recently to appear in the estimates. The figures, released by UNICEF, are reported in a Comment published Online First and in this week's edition of The Lancet . The Comment is written by a Dr Danzhen You, UNICEF, New York, USA, and colleagues. The latest data, relating to 2008, has heightened concerns that many regions (and countries within them), are not on-track to meet Millennium Development Goal 4, which aims to reduce under-5 mortality by two thirds between 1990 and 2015.
The key findings are:
For Dr Danzhen You, UNICEF, New York, USA, and colleagues, please contact Christopher de Bono, Head of Communications, UNICEF. T) +1 (212) 303 7984 E) cdebono@unicef.org
For full Comment, see: http://press.thelancet.com/unicef2009.pdf
Note to editors: *Generating accurate estimates of under-5 mortality poses a considerable challenge because of the limited data available for many developing countries. In response, experts at UNICEF, WHO, the World Bank, the UN Population Division (UNPD), and members of the academic community formed the Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation (IGME).
**MDG4=reducing mortality in children under 5 years by two thirds between 1990 and 2015
***To meet MDG4, the required reduction is two thirds between 1990-2015, which translates to an AARR of 4.4%. But to be 'on track' is slightly different from this—all countries with mortality lower than 40 per 1,000 live births are considered on track. Countries with mortality rates of 40 or higher are on-track if their AARR is equal to or greater than 4.0%. The reason the threshold is set at 4.0% rather 4.4% is to allow for the margins of uncertainty around the estimates.
The Lancet