Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36443740›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2022

Relative acquisition evaluation of health poverty alleviation project: a quantitative study of data from different regions of China.

Xinjie Zhang, Ying Luo, Wei Chen, Jingru Huang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors.

Xinjie ZhangDepartment of Public Administration, School of Management, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China. 1000004773@ujs.edu.cn.
Ying LuoDepartment of Public Administration, School of Management, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China.
Wei ChenDepartment of Personnel and Social Security, School of Governmentment, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
Jingru HuangAdministration Office, Affiliated Hospital of Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoverty is the greatest obstacle to the realization of human rights, among which illness is the leading cause in China. In 2015, China began to implement the health poverty alleviation project (HPAP). By 2020, all rural households living below the current poverty level (2300 yuan per person per year) have been lifted out of poverty.

methodsThis study introduces the concept of relative acquisition and constructs a scale based on the capability approach to measure the relative acquisition and compares its fairness of HPAP.

resultsThe findings show that the values of the relative acquisition of HPAP in survey areas are all reached middle level (0.4-0.6), with 0 indicating the worst level and 1 indicating the best level. Specifically, the values of the functional activities of "health care", "health ability", "equal treatment opportunities" and "social support" are all above 0.4, while the values of "economic conditions" and "health education" are below 0.4.

conclusionsThe HPAP plays a significant role in reducing the economic burden of disease on patients. However, due to insufficient social support and health education, the HPAP objects lack endogenous motivation to fight against poverty, and the fairness also needs to be improved.

Indexed as

Financial StressPovertyChinaHealth EducationHumansSocial SupportCapability approachEquityEvaluationHealth poverty alleviation projectRelative acquisition

Identifiers

PMID36443740
PMCPMC9707105

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.