Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28189819›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2017

Sensitivity of measuring the progress in financial risk protection to survey design and its socioeconomic and demographic determinants: A case study in Rwanda.

Chunling Lu, Kai Liu, Lingling Li, Yuhong Yang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors.

Chunling LuDivision of Global Health Equity, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, United States. Electronic address: chunling_lu@hms.harvard.edu.
Kai LiuDepartment of Social Security, School of Labor and Human Resources, Renmin University of China, Haidian District, Beijing 100872, China.
Lingling LiDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, United States.
Yuhong YangSchool of Statistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, United States.

Funding

The Role of Development Assistance for Health in Reducing Child MortalityK01HD071929 · NICHD · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI LU, CHUNLING · 2012 to 2016
$686k
NICHD NIH HHS K01 HD071929
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reliable and comparable information on households with catastrophic health expenditure (HCHE) is crucial for monitoring and evaluating our progress towards achieving universal financial risk protection. This study aims to investigate the sensitivity of measuring the progress in financial risk protection to survey design and its socioeconomic and demographic determinants. Using the Rwanda Integrated Living Conditions Survey in 2005 and 2010/2011, we derived the level and trend of the percentage of the HCHE using out-of-pocket health spending data derived from (1) a health module with a two-week recall period and six (2005)/seven (2010/2011) survey questions (Method 1) and (2) a consumption module with a four-week/ten-/12-month recall period and 11(2005)/24 (2010/2011) questions (Method 2). Using multilevel logistic regression analysis, we investigated the household socioeconomic and demographic characteristics that affected the sensitivity of estimating the HCHE to survey design. We found that Method 1 generated a significantly higher HCHE estimate (9.2%, 95% confidence interval 8.4%-10.0%) than Method2 (7.4%, 6.6%-8.1%) in 2005 and lower estimate (5.6%, 5.2%-6.1%) than Method 2 (8.2%, 7.6%-8.7%) in 2010/2011. The estimated trends of the HCHE using the two methods were not consistent between the two years. A household's size, its income quintile, having no under-five children, and educational level of its head were positively associated with the consistency of its HCHE status when using the two survey methods. Estimates of the progress in financial risk protection, especially among the most vulnerable households, are sensitive to survey design. These results are robust to various thresholds of catastrophic health spending. Future work must focus on mitigating survey effects through the development of statistical tools.

Indexed as

Catastrophic IllnessDemographyHealth ExpendituresHumansIncomeRisk Sharing, FinancialRwandaSensitivity and SpecificitySocial ConditionsSocioeconomic FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesWeights and MeasuresDeveloping countriesFinancial risk protectionMeasuring catastrophic health expenditureMeasuring out-of-pocket health expenditureRural RwandaSurvey designSurvey instruments

Identifiers

PMID28189819
PMCPMC5461655

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.