Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33087394›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2020

Geospatial evaluation of trade-offs between equity in physical access to healthcare and health systems efficiency.

Hari S Iyer, John Flanigan, Nicholas G Wolf, Lee Frederick Schroeder, Susan Horton, Marcia C Castro, Timothy R Rebbeck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

Hari S IyerDivision of Population Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA hai161@mail.harvard.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-7596-9049
John FlaniganZhu Family Center for Global Cancer Prevention, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Nicholas G WolfZhu Family Center for Global Cancer Prevention, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Lee Frederick SchroederDepartment of Pathology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Susan HortonSchool of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9243-4767
Marcia C CastroDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard University T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4606-2795
Timothy R RebbeckDivision of Population Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

Training Program in Cancer EpidemiologyT32CA009001 · NCI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI A. Heather Eliassen, Meir Stampfer · 1985 to 2026
$17.3M
Nutritional Assessment of Cancer Risk in African MenU01CA184374 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INST · PI REBBECK, TIMOTHY R · 2015 to 2019
$9.1M
NCI NIH HHS T32 CA009001NCI NIH HHS U01 CA184374
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDecisions regarding the geographical placement of healthcare services require consideration of trade-offs between equity and efficiency, but few empirical assessments are available. We applied a novel geospatial framework to study these trade-offs in four African countries.

methodsGeolocation data on population density (a surrogate for efficiency), health centres and cancer referral centres in Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania and Rwanda were obtained from online databases. Travel time to the closest facility (a surrogate for equity) was estimated with 1 km resolution using the Access Mod 5 least cost distance algorithm. We studied associations between district-level average population density and travel time to closest facility for each country using Pearson's correlation, and spatial autocorrelation using the Global Moran's I statistic. Geographical clusters of districts with inefficient resource allocation were identified using the bivariate local indicator of spatial autocorrelation.

resultsPopulation density was inversely associated with travel time for all countries and levels of the health system (Pearson's correlation range, health centres: -0.89 to -0.71; cancer referral centres: -0.92 to -0.43), favouring efficiency. For health centres, negative spatial autocorrelation (geographical clustering of dissimilar values of population density and travel time) was weaker in Rwanda (-0.310) and Tanzania (-0.292), countries with explicit policies supporting equitable access to rural healthcare, relative to Kenya (-0.579) and Malawi (-0.543). Stronger spatial autocorrelation was observed for cancer referral centres (Rwanda: -0.341; Tanzania: -0.259; Kenya: -0.595; Malawi: -0.666). Significant geographical clusters of sparsely populated districts with long travel times to care were identified across countries.

conclusionNegative spatial correlations suggested that the geographical distribution of health services favoured efficiency over equity, but spatial autocorrelation measures revealed more equitable geographical distribution of facilities in certain countries. These findings suggest that even when prioritising efficiency, thoughtful decisions regarding geographical allocation could increase equitable physical access to services.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareHealth FacilitiesHumansKenyaRwandaTanzaniageographic information systemshealth policyhealth services researchhealth systems evaluationpublic health

Identifiers

PMID33087394
PMCPMC7580044

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.