Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31088453›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2019

General practice for the poor and specialist services for the rich: inequality evidence from a cross-sectional survey on Hangzhou residents, China.

Tao Zhang, Chaojie Liu, Lingrui Liu, Yong Gan, Wei Lu, Hongbing Tao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors.

Tao ZhangDepartment of Health Management, School of Medicine and Health Management, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No.13, Aviation Road, Qiaokou District, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Chaojie LiuSchool of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
Lingrui LiuDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA.
Yong GanDepartment of Social Medicine and Health Management, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China.
Wei LuDepartment of Health Management, School of Medicine and Health Management, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No.13, Aviation Road, Qiaokou District, Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Hongbing TaoDepartment of Health Management, School of Medicine and Health Management, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No.13, Aviation Road, Qiaokou District, Wuhan, Hubei, China. hhbtao@hust.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInequalities in health care services are becoming an increasing concern in the world including in China. This study measured the income-related inequalities of residents in Hangzhou of China in access to general practice and specialist care and identified socioeconomic factors associated with such inequalities.

methodsA cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted on 1048 residents in ten urban communities in Hangzhou, China. The percentage and frequency of respondents visiting general practice (GP) and hospital specialist clinics over the past four weeks prior to the survey were estimated. Income-related inequalities in access to these services were measured by the concentration index. Logistic regression and Poisson regression models were established to decompose the contributions of socioeconomic factors (residency, income, education, marital status, and social health insurance) to the inequalities in the probability and frequency of accessing these services, respectively, after adjustment for the needs factors (age, sex and illness conditions).

resultsThe GP services were in favor of the poor, with a concentration index of - 0.0464 and - 0.1346 for the probability and frequency of GP visits, respectively. In contrast, the specialist services were in favor of the rich, with a concentration index of 0.1258 and 0.1279 for the probability and frequency of specialist visits, respectively. Income is the biggest contributor to the inequalities, except for the frequency of visits to specialists in which education played the greatest role.

conclusionsIncome-related inequalities in GP and specialist care are evident in China. Policy interventions should pay increasing attention to the emergence of a two-tier system, potentially enlarging socioeconomic disparities in health care services.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGeneral PracticeHealthcare DisparitiesHealth Care SurveysHumansMaleMiddle AgedSocioeconomic FactorsSpecializationYoung AdultChinaConcentration indexGeneral practiceInequalitySpecialist care

Identifiers

PMID31088453
PMCPMC6518799

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.