Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27905941›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2016

Financing strategies to improve essential public health equalization and its effects in China.

Li Yang, Li Sun, Liankui Wen, Huyang Zhang, Chenyang Li, Kara Hanson, Hai Fang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  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. Observational
  17. Observational
  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

7 authors.

Li YangSchool of Public Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.
Li SunSchool of Public Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.
Liankui WenSchool of Public Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.
Huyang ZhangChina Center for Health Development Studies, Peking University, No 38 Xueyuan Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China.
Chenyang LiChina Center for Health Development Studies, Peking University, No 38 Xueyuan Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China.
Kara HansonLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Hai FangChina Center for Health Development Studies, Peking University, No 38 Xueyuan Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China. hfang@hsc.pku.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2009, China launched a health reform to promote the equalization of national essential public health services package (NEPHSP). The present study aimed to describe the financing strategies and mechanisms to improve access to public health for all, identify the strengths and weaknesses of the different approaches, and showed evidence on equity improvement among different regions.

methodsWe reviewed the relevant literatures and identified 208 articles after screening and quality assessment and conducted six key informants' interviews. Secondary data on national and local government health expenditures, NEPHSP coverage and health indicators in 2003-2014 were collected, descriptive and equity analyses were used.

resultsBefore 2009, the government subsidy to primary care institutions (PCIs) were mainly used for basic construction and a small part of personnel expenses. Since 2009, the new funds for NEPHSP have significantly expanded service coverage and population coverage. These funds have been allocated by central, provincial, municipal and county governments at different proportions in China's tax distribution system. Due to the fiscal transfer payment, the Central Government allocated more subsides to less-developed western regions and all the funds were managed in a specific account. Several types of payment methods have been adopted including capitation, pay for performance (P4P), pay for service items, global budget and public health voucher, to address issues from both the supply and demand sides. The equalization of NEPHSP did well through the establishment of health records, systematic care of children and maternal women, etc. Our data showed that the gap between the eastern, central and western regions narrowed. However the coverage for migrants was still low and performance was needed improving in effectiveness of managing patients with chronic diseases.

conclusionsThe delivery of essential public health services was highly influenced by public fiscal policy, and the implementation of health reform since 2009 has led the public health development towards the right direction. However China still needs to increase the fiscal investments to expand service coverage as well as promote the quality of public health services and equality among regions. Independent scientific monitoring and evaluation are also needed.

Indexed as

Health Status DisparitiesAdultChildChinaFinancing, GovernmentHealth Care ReformHealth ExpendituresHealth Services AccessibilityHumansLocal GovernmentPrimary Health CarePublic HealthReimbursement, IncentiveChinaEffectsEqualizationFinancing strategiesPublic health services

Identifiers

PMID27905941
PMCPMC5134004

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.