Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28077150›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2017

The equity of China's emergency medical services from 2010-2014.

Ke Yan, Yi Jiang, Jingfu Qiu, Xiaoni Zhong, Yang Wang, Jing Deng, Jingxi Lian, Tingting Wang, Cheng Cao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  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

9 authors.

Ke YanThe Research Center for Medicine and Social Development, Collaborative Innovation Center of Social Risks Governance in Health, School of Public Health and Management, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 400016, China.
Yi JiangThe Research Center for Medicine and Social Development, Collaborative Innovation Center of Social Risks Governance in Health, School of Public Health and Management, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 400016, China. jiangyilaoshi@163.com.
Jingfu QiuThe Research Center for Medicine and Social Development, Collaborative Innovation Center of Social Risks Governance in Health, School of Public Health and Management, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 400016, China.
Xiaoni ZhongThe Research Center for Medicine and Social Development, Collaborative Innovation Center of Social Risks Governance in Health, School of Public Health and Management, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 400016, China.
Yang WangThe Research Center for Medicine and Social Development, Collaborative Innovation Center of Social Risks Governance in Health, School of Public Health and Management, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 400016, China.
Jing DengThe Research Center for Medicine and Social Development, Collaborative Innovation Center of Social Risks Governance in Health, School of Public Health and Management, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 400016, China.
Jingxi LianThe Research Center for Medicine and Social Development, Collaborative Innovation Center of Social Risks Governance in Health, School of Public Health and Management, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 400016, China.
Tingting WangThe Research Center for Medicine and Social Development, Collaborative Innovation Center of Social Risks Governance in Health, School of Public Health and Management, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 400016, China.
Cheng CaoThe Research Center for Medicine and Social Development, Collaborative Innovation Center of Social Risks Governance in Health, School of Public Health and Management, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 400016, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith the depth development of health care system reform in China, emergency medical services (EMS) is confronted with challenges as well as opportunities. This study aimed to analyze the equity of China's EMS needs, utilization, and resources distribution, and put forward proposal to improve the equity.

methodThree emergency needs indicators (mortality rate of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases, harm, and digestive system disease), two utilization indicators (emergency outpatient visits and rate of utilization) and one resource allocation indicator (number of EMS facilities) were collected after the review of the China Statistical Yearbook and the National Disease Surveillance System. Next, EMS related indicators were compared among 31 provinces from the eastern, central, and western regions of the country. Concentration Index (CI) were used to measure the equity of EMS needs and utilization among the western, central, and eastern regions. The Gini coefficient of demographic and geographic distribution of facilities represented the equity of resource allocation.

resultDuring 2010-2014, the CI of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease mortality changed from positive to negative, which indicates that the concentrated trend transferred from richer regions to the poorer area. Injury mortality (CI: range from - 0.1241to -0.1504) and digestive disease mortality (CI: range from - 0.1921 to - 0.2279) consistently concentrated in the poorer region, and the inequity among regions became more obviously year-by-year. The utilization of EMS (CI: range from 0.1074 to 0.0824) showed an improvement; however, the inequity reduced gradually. The EMS facilities distribution by population (Gini coefficient: range from 0.0922 to 0.1200) showed high equitability but the EMS facilities distribution by geography (Gini coefficient: range from 0.0922 to 0.1200) suggested a huge gap between regions because the Gini coefficients were greater than 0.5 in the past 5 years.

conclusionThere are some inequities of needs, utilization, and resource allocation in the China EMS. The government needs to stick to the principle of increasing investment in poorer regions, perfecting ambulance configuration and improving health workers' professional skills to improve the equity and quality of EMS.

Indexed as

Emergency Medical ServicesChinaHealth Care ReformHealth EquityHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansPoverty AreasResource AllocationChinaEmergency medical servicesEquity

Identifiers

PMID28077150
PMCPMC5225518

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.