Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31644800›Full record

ArticleHealth policy and planning2019

Who benefits from healthcare spending in Cambodia? Evidence for a universal health coverage policy.

Augustine D Asante, Por Ir, Bart Jacobs, Limwattananon Supon, Marco Liverani, Andrew Hayen, Stephen Jan, Virginia Wiseman

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health policy and planning, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

25 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. Review
  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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Augustine D AsanteSchool of Public Health & Community Medicine, University of New South Wales (UNSW) Sydney, Kensington NSW, Australia.
Por IrNational Institute of Public Health, Lot no 80, Street 289, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Bart JacobsNational Institute of Public Health, Lot no 80, Street 289, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Limwattananon SuponKhon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Marco LiveraniDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, Kings Cross, London, UK.
Andrew HayenUniversity of Technology Sydney (UTS), 15 Broadway, Ultimo NSW, Australia.
Stephen JanThe George Institute for Global Health, Newtown, Australia.
Virginia WisemanDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, Kings Cross, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cambodia's healthcare system has seen significant improvements in the last two decades. Despite this, access to quality care remains problematic, particularly for poor rural Cambodians. The government has committed to universal health coverage (UHC) and is reforming the health financing system to align with this goal. The extent to which the reforms have impacted the poor is not always clear. Using a system-wide approach, this study assesses how benefits from healthcare spending are distributed across socioeconomic groups in Cambodia. Benefit incidence analysis was employed to assess the distribution of benefits from health spending. Primary data on the use of health services and the costs associated with it were collected through a nationally representative cross-sectional survey of 5000 households. Secondary data from the 2012-14 Cambodia National Health Accounts and other official documents were used to estimate the unit costs of services. The results indicate that benefits from health spending at the primary care level in the public sector are distributed in favour of the poor, with about 32% of health centre benefits going to the poorest population quintile. Public hospital outpatient benefits are quite evenly distributed across all wealth quintiles, although the concentration index of -0.058 suggests a moderately pro-poor distribution. Benefits for public hospital inpatient care are substantially pro-poor. The private sector was significantly skewed towards the richest quintile. Relative to health need, the distribution of total benefits in the public sector is pro-poor while the private sector is relatively pro-rich. Looking across the entire health system, health financing in Cambodia appears to benefit the poor more than the rich but a significant proportion of spending remains in the private sector which is largely pro-rich. There is the need for some government regulation of the private sector if Cambodia is to achieve its UHC goals.

Indexed as

Health PolicyPovertyCambodiaCross-Sectional StudiesDeveloping CountriesFemaleFinancing, GovernmentHealthcare DisparitiesHealth ServicesHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMalePrivate SectorPublic SectorUniversal Health Insurancebenefit incidence analysisCambodiaEquityhealth financinguniversal health coverage

Identifiers

PMID31644800
PMCPMC6807515

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.