Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27484465›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2016

Types of health care facilities and the quality of primary care: a study of characteristics and experiences of Chinese patients in Guangdong Province, China.

Ruwei Hu, Yu Liao, Zhicheng Du, Yuantao Hao, Hailun Liang, Leiyu Shi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

57 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Why the oldest old in China bypass primary care: culture, family, and health system limitations.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2025
    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

6 authors.

Ruwei HuSchool of Public Health of Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road II, Guangzhou, China.
Yu LiaoSchool of Public Health of Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road II, Guangzhou, China.
Zhicheng DuSchool of Public Health of Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road II, Guangzhou, China.
Yuantao HaoSchool of Public Health of Sun Yat-sen University, 74 Zhongshan Road II, Guangzhou, China.
Hailun LiangJohns Hopkins Primary Care Policy Center, Baltimore, 624 N. Broadway, Baltimore, Maryland, 21205, USA.
Leiyu ShiJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 N. Broadway, Baltimore, Maryland, 21205, USA. lshi@jhsph.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn China, most people tend to use hospitals rather than health centers for their primary care generally due to the perception that quality of care provided in the hospital setting is superior to that provided at the health centers. No studies have been conducted in China to compare the quality of primary care provided at different health care settings. The purpose of this study is to compare the quality of primary care provided in different types of health care facilities in China.

methodsA cross-sectional survey with patients was conducted in Guangdong province of China, using the validated Chinese Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCAT). ANOVA was performed to compare the overall and 10 domains of primary care quality for patients in tertiary, secondary, and primary health care settings. Multivariate analyses were used to assess the association between types of facility and quality of primary care attributes while controlling for sociodemographic and health care characteristics.

resultsThe final number of respondents was 864 including 161 from county hospitals, 190 from rural community health centers (CHCs), 164 from tertiary hospitals, 80 from secondary hospitals, and 269 from urban CHCs. Type of health care facilities was significantly associated with total PCAT score and domain scores. CHC was associated with higher total PCAT score and scores for first contact-access, ongoing care, comprehensiveness-services available, and community orientation than secondary and/or tertiary hospitals, after controlling for patients' demographic and health characteristics. Higher PCAT score was associated with greater satisfaction with primary care received. CHC patients were more likely to report satisfactory experiences compared to patients from secondary and tertiary facilities.

conclusionsThe study demonstrated that CHCs provided better quality primary care when compared with secondary and tertiary health care facilities, justifying CHCs as a model of primary care delivery.

Indexed as

Community Health CentersQuality of Health CareTertiary Care CentersAdolescentAdultChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PolicyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareRural PopulationYoung AdultHealth policyHealth services developmentHealth systemsQuality assessment

Identifiers

PMID27484465
PMCPMC4969734

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.