ArticleCureus2023
Situational Analysis of Healthcare and Medical Diagnostic Testing Facility Availability in Selected Blocks of Muzaffarpur District, Bihar, India: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study presents a comprehensive assessment of healthcare facilities, focusing on workforce composition, operational dynamics, diagnostic laboratory services, and accessibility considerations. The comparison between government and private healthcare sectors provides insights into service delivery and potential disparities. The study's rationale, objectives, and methodology are explored in the context of the Indian healthcare landscape.
methodsA cross-sectional analysis was conducted in Muzaffarpur district, Bihar, targeting selected urban and rural blocks. The study employed geolocation data to analyze accessibility to healthcare facilities. Data collection involved on-site visits, structured questionnaires, and consultation of the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR)'s framework. The assessment concentrated on the availability of tests offered by the LaBike platform, and workforce compositions were compared.
resultsGovernment healthcare facilities exhibited a balanced distribution of doctors, nurses, and grassroot workers, reflecting comprehensive healthcare provisions. Private facilities, although featuring moderate doctor and nurse presence, lacked grassroot workers. Diagnostic test prevalence was evident, with core tests, such as CBC and blood glucose, available in over 85% of facilities. Government facilities provided tests free of charge, while private facilities showcased a diverse cost spectrum. Proposed interventions received strong support from both sectors, indicating the potential for innovative healthcare solutions. Accessibility analysis: Urban intervention and control sites demonstrated comparable accessibility, with facilities located within 2 km. In rural intervention and control sites, distances varied significantly. Mushahari, a rural intervention site, required participants to travel 6 km to the nearest facility, impacting healthcare access. By contrast, Marwan, a rural control site, featured a shorter distance of 3 km.
conclusionThis study's comprehensive evaluation of healthcare facilities offers valuable insights into workforce dynamics, diagnostic services, and healthcare interventions in the context of government and private sectors. The findings underscore the significance of addressing workforce gaps and promoting equitable access to diagnostics. By informing evidence-based decision-making, this study contributes to the optimization of healthcare service delivery, aiming to enhance healthcare quality and accessibility for all.
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.