Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30258653›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2018

Why patients prefer high-level healthcare facilities: a qualitative study using focus groups in rural and urban China.

Yun Liu, Liwei Zhong, Shasha Yuan, Joris van de Klundert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 87 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
87citing 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

87 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Study on edge villages based on cross-region healthcare-seeking behavior.International journal of health geographics · 2025
    Article
  7. From Habit to Justification: A Dual Process Theory Approach to Primary Care Bypassing in China.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2025
    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

27 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Yun LiuErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7384-1351
Liwei ZhongShanghai General Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Shasha YuanInstitute of Medical Information and Library, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College (IMICAMS), Beijing, China.
Joris van de KlundertPrince Mohammad Bin Salman College of Business and Entrepreneurship, King Abdullah Economic City, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite policy measure to strengthen and promote primary care, Chinese patients increasingly choose to access higher level hospitals. The resulting overcrowding at higher level hospitals and underutilisation of primary care are viewed to diminish the effects of the continuing health system investments on population health. We explore the factors that influence the choice of healthcare facility level in rural and urban China and aim to reveal the underlying choice processes.

methodsWe conducted eight semistructured focus group discussions among the general population and the chronically ill in a rural area in Chongqing and an urban area in Shanghai. Respondents' discussions of (evidence-based) factors and how they influenced their facility choices were analysed using qualitative analysis techniques, from which we elicited choice process maps to capture the partial order in which the factors were considered in the choice process.

resultsThe factors considered, after initial illness perception, varied over four stages of health service utilisation: initial visit, diagnosis, treatment and treatment continuation. The factors considered per stage differed considerably between the rural and urban respondents, but less so between the general population and the chronically ill. Moreover, the rural respondents considered the township health centres as default and prefer to continue in primary care, yet access higher levels when necessary. Urban respondents chose higher levels by default and seldom moved down to primary care.

conclusionsDisease severity, medical staff, transportation convenience, equipment and drug availability played important roles when choosing healthcare facilities in China. Strengthening primary care correspondingly may well be effective to increase primary care utilisation by the rural population but insufficient for the urban population. The developed four-stage process maps are general enough to serve as the basis for (partially) ordering factors influencing facility level choices in other contexts.

Indexed as

Chinese health reformfocus groupshealthcare-seeking behaviorpatient choiceprimary health carequalitative study

Identifiers

PMID30258653
PMCPMC6150133

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.