Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32085714›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2020

Identifying optimal indicators and purposes of population segmentation through engagement of key stakeholders: a qualitative study.

Sungwon Yoon, Hendra Goh, Yu Heng Kwan, Julian Thumboo, Lian Leng Low

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors.

Sungwon YoonProgram in Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore.
Hendra GohFaculty of Science, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Yu Heng KwanProgram in Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore.
Julian ThumbooProgram in Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore.
Lian Leng LowRegional Health System, Singapore Health Services, Singapore, Singapore. low.lian.leng@singhealth.com.sg.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4228-2862

Funding

SingHealth PULSES Centre NMRC/CG/027/2017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVarious population segmentation tools have been developed to inform the design of interventions that improve population health. However, there has been little consensus on the core indicators and purposes of population segmentation. The existing frameworks were further limited by their applicability in different practice settings involving stakeholders at all levels. The aim of this study was to generate a comprehensive set of indicators and purposes of population segmentation based on the experience and perspectives of key stakeholders involved in population health.

methodsWe conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews using purposive sampling with key stakeholders (e.g. government officials, healthcare professionals, social service providers, researchers) involved in population health at three distinct levels (micro, meso, macro) in Singapore. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic content analysis was undertaken using NVivo 12.

resultsA total of 25 interviews were conducted. Eight core indicators (demographic characteristics, economic characteristics, behavioural characteristics, disease state, functional status, organisation of care, psychosocial factors and service needs of patients) and 21 sub-indicators were identified. Age and financial status were commonly stated as important indicators that could potentially be used for population segmentation across three levels of participants. Six intended purposes for population segmentation included improving health outcomes, planning for resource allocation, optimising healthcare utilisation, enhancing psychosocial and behavioural outcomes, strengthening preventive efforts and driving policy changes. There was consensus that planning for resource allocation and improving health outcomes were considered two of the most important purposes for population segmentation.

conclusionsOur findings shed light on the need for a more person-centric population segmentation framework that incorporates upstream and holistic indicators to be able to measure population health outcomes and to plan for appropriate resource allocation. Core elements of the framework may apply to other healthcare settings and systems responsible for improving population health.

trial registrationThe study was approved by the SingHealth Institutional Review Board (CIRB Reference number: 2017/2597).

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsChildChild, PreschoolDelivery of Health CareFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleMiddle AgedData drivenExpert drivenIndicatorPopulation segmentationPurpose

Identifiers

PMID32085714
PMCPMC7035731

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.