Associations between type of blood collection, analytical approach, mean haemoglobin and anaemia prevalence in population-based surveys: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Previous studies have observed that haemoglobin concen-trations can be affected by type of blood collection, analysis methods and device, and that near-in-time population-based surveys report substantially different anaemia prevalence. We investigated whether differences in mean haemoglobin or prevalence of anaemia between near-in-time surveys of the same population were associated with differences in type of blood collec-tion or analytic approach to haemoglobin measurement.Methods We systematically identified pairs of population-based surveys that measured haemoglobin in the same population of women of reproduc-tive age (WRA) or preschool-aged children (PSC). Surveys were matched on geographic coverage, urban/rural place of residence, inclusion of preg-nant women, time of data collection (within 18 months), and, to the ex-tent feasible, age range. Differences in anaemia prevalence were presented graphically. Random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression of differ-ence in mean haemoglobin were carried out, with subgroups defined by comparison of type of blood collection and analytic approach within each survey pair.Results We included 23 survey pairs from 17 countries for PSC and 17 survey pairs from 11 countries for WRA. Meta-regression indicates that surveys measuring haemoglobin with HemoCue (R) Hb 301 found higher haemoglobin concentrations than near-in-time surveys using HemoCue (R) Hb 201+ in non-pregnant women ((NPW); 5.8 g/L (95% confidence inter-val (CI) = 3.2-8.3) mean difference, n = 5 pairs) and PSC (4.3 g/L (1.4-7.2), n = 6). Surveys collecting venous blood found higher haemoglobin concen-trations than near-in-time surveys collecting capillary blood in PSC (3.8 g/L (0.8-6.7), n = 8), but not NPW (0.5 g/L (-1.9-2.8), n = 9).Conclusions Because this study is observational, differences in haemoglo-bin concentrations in near-in-time surveys may be caused by other factors associated with choice of analytic approach or type of blood collected. The source or sources of differences should be clarified to improve use of sur-veys to prioritize and evaluate public health programs.Registration PROSPERO CRD42022296553.