Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29921260›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2018

Underlying determinants of health provider choice in urban slums: results from a discrete choice experiment in Ahmedabad, India.

Vilius Černauskas, Federica Angeli, Anand Kumar Jaiswal, Milena Pavlova

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 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. Article
  17. Identifying Determinants for Traveled Distance and Bypassing in Outpatient Care: A Scoping Review.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
    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.

Vilius ČernauskasDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Duboisdomein 30, P.O. Box 6200 MD, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Federica AngeliDepartment of Organization Studies, School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, Warandelaan 2, Tilburg, 5000 LE, The Netherlands. f.angeli@tilburguniversity.edu.
Anand Kumar JaiswalIndian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Vastrapur, Ahmedabad, 380015, India.
Milena PavlovaDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Duboisdomein 30, P.O. Box 6200 MD, Maastricht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSevere underutilization of healthcare facilities and lack of timely, affordable and effective access to healthcare services in resource-constrained, bottom of pyramid (BoP) settings are well-known issues, which foster a negative cycle of poor health outcomes, catastrophic health expenditures and poverty. Understanding BoP patients' healthcare choices is vital to inform policymakers' effective resource allocation and improve population health and livelihood in these areas. This paper examines the factors affecting the choice of health care provider in low-income settings, specifically the urban slums in India.

methodA discrete choice experiment was carried out to elicit stated preferences of BoP populations. A total of 100 respondents were sampled using a multi-stage systemic random sampling of urban slums. Attributes were selected based on previous studies in developing countries, findings of a previous exploratory study in the study setting and qualitative interviews. Provider type and cost, distance to the facility, attitude of doctor and staff, appropriateness of care and familiarity with doctor were the attributes included in the study. A random effects logit regression was used to perform the analysis. Interaction effects were included to control for individual characteristics.

resultsThe relatively most valued attribute is appropriateness of care (β=3.4213, p = 0.00), followed by familiarity with the doctor (β=2.8497, p = 0.00) and attitude of the doctor and staff towards the patient (β=1.8132, p = 0.00). As expected, respondents prefer shorter distance (β= - 0.0722, p = 0.00) but the relatively low importance of the attribute distance to the facility indicate that respondents are willing to travel longer if any of the other statistically significant attributes are present. Also, significant socioeconomic differences in preferences were observed, especially with regard to the type of provider.

conclusionThe analyses did not reveal universal preferences for a provider type, but overall the traditional provider type is not well accepted. It also became evident that respondents valued appropriateness of care above other attributes. Despite the study limitations, the results have broader policy implications in the context of Indian government's attempts to reduce high healthcare out-of-pocket expenditures and provide universal health coverage for its population. The government's attempt to emphasize the focus on traditional providers should be carefully reconsidered.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorPoverty AreasUrban PopulationAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleHealth FacilitiesHumansIndiaInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CareQualitative ResearchYoung AdultBottom of the pyramidDiscrete choice experimentHealth provider choiceHealth-seeking behaviourUrban slums

Identifiers

PMID29921260
PMCPMC6006661

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.