ArticleBMJ open2021
Perceived effect of financial risk protection by the Urban-Rural Resident Basic Medical Insurance Scheme: a mixed-methods study of rural residents in China.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing intervention effects on healthcare-related financial protection in low- and middle-income countries: a rapid evidence review.Health policy and planning · 2026Review
- Medical insurance-related professionals' identification of the benefits of the medical insurance system in Northeast China: a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Study on the willingness to enroll in the urban and rural residents basic medical insurance: from the perspectives of policy awareness and institutional trust.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- The effect of urban-rural resident basic medical insurance on physical health of the rural older adult in China.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- The development and validation of a patient-reported outcome measure to assess financial hardship among older cancer survivors in China: hardship and recovery with distress survey.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Perceptions of the benefits of the basic medical insurance system among the insured: a mixed methods research of a northern city in China.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Article
- Can Basic Medical Insurance Reduce Elderly Family Income Inequality in China?Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIt is to explore the perceived financial risk protection effect of the Urban-Rural Resident Basic Medical Insurance Scheme (URRBMI) and its influencing factors to provide evidence to further improve the URRBMI.
designIt is a cross-sectional survey.
participantsThis mixed-methods study is conducted in five provinces in rural China. Through stratified cluster random sampling, 1681 rural residents participate in a cross-sectional questionnaire survey (1657 valid questionnaires are retrieved). Thirty rural residents participate in in-depth interviews. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: A multivariate logistic regression analysis is adopted to identify factors influencing respondents' perceptions. Semistructured interviews are used to identify the reasons why some respondents believed the URRBMI to be ineffective.
resultsOverall, 77.5% of respondents believe that the URRBMI is effective. Respondents, who are older, have a higher household income, prefer primary health facilities and provide a higher rating for critical illness compensation and maximum compensatory payouts. They are more likely to give the URRBMI a higher effectiveness rating than their counterparts. Qualitatively, participants who believe the URRBMI to be ineffective list the following reasons: low outpatient service coverage, insufficient or undersupplied drugs and services in the insurance list, problems in the arrangement of deductibles and maximum compensatory payouts, provider-induced behaviour and increased healthcare service price.
conclusionsThis exploration focuses on the reasons why rural residents think the scheme is invalid, which are vital for policy reform. Policies should focus on benefits design and coverage, the assumption of a supervisory role, avoiding financial risk stemming from critical illness and cross-sectoral actions to strengthen the primary healthcare system and comprehensive social security wealth.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.