Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24386284›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

China's rural public health system performance: a cross-sectional study.

Miaomiao Tian, Da Feng, Xi Chen, Yingchun Chen, Xi Sun, Yuanxi Xiang, Fang Yuan, Zhanchun Feng

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Inequalities in Older age and Primary Health Care Utilization in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review.International journal of health services : planning, administration, evaluation · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Miaomiao TianSchool of Medicine and Health Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China ; Institute of Medical Information, Center for Health Policy and Management, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Da FengSchool of Medicine and Health Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Xi ChenSchool of Medicine and Health Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China ; School of Management, Jiangsu University, Zhanjiang, Jiangsu, China.
Yingchun ChenSchool of Medicine and Health Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Xi SunSchool of Medicine and Health Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Yuanxi XiangSchool of Medicine and Health Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Fang YuanSchool of Medicine and Health Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Zhanchun FengSchool of Medicine and Health Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Huazhong University of Science and Technology · CNChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the past three years, the Government of China initiated health reform with rural public health system construction to achieve equal access to public health services for rural residents. The study assessed trends of public health services accessibility in rural China from 2008 to 2010, as well as the current situation about the China's rural public health system performance.

methodsThe data were collected from a cross-sectional survey conducted in 2011, which used a multistage stratified random sampling method to select 12 counties and 118 villages from China. Three sets of indicators were chosen to measure the trends in access to coverage, equality and effectiveness of rural public health services. Data were disaggregated by provinces and by participants: hypertension patients, children, elderly and women. We examined the changes in equality across and within region.

resultsChina's rural public health system did well in safe drinking water, children vaccinations and women hospital delivery. But more hypertension patients with low income could not receive regular healthcare from primary health institutions than those with middle and high income. In 2010, hypertension treatment rate of Qinghai in Western China was just 53.22% which was much lower than that of Zhejiang in Eastern China (97.27%). Meanwhile, low performance was showed in effectiveness of rural public health services. The rate of effective treatment for controlling their blood pressure within normal range was just 39.7%.

conclusionsThe implementation of health reform since 2009 has led the public health development towards the right direction. Physical access to public health services had increased from 2008 to 2010. But, inter- and intra-regional inequalities in public health system coverage still exist. Strategies to improve the quality and equality of public health services in rural China need to be considered.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedChildChild, PreschoolChinaCross-Sectional StudiesDemographyFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleMiddle AgedPublic Health

Identifiers

PMID24386284
PMCPMC3873379
OpenAlexW2091095281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.