Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38039764›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2024

Voting with their feet: Primary care provider choice and its implications for public sector primary care services in India.

Krishna D Rao, Akriti Mehta, Caitlin Noonan, Michael A Peters, Henry Perry

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Reorienting health systems towards Primary Health Care in South Asia.The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2024
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Krishna D RaoDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: kdrao@jhu.edu.
Akriti MehtaDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: amehta41@jhu.edu.
Caitlin NoonanDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: cnoonan4@jhmi.edu.
Michael A PetersDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: mpeters@jhu.edu.
Henry PerryDepartment of International Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: hperry2@jhu.edu.
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Expanding networks of government primary health centers (PHCs) to bring health services closer to communities is a longstanding policy objective in LMICs. In pluralistic health systems, where public and private providers compete for patients, PHCs are often not the preferred source for care. This study analyzes the market for primary care services in the Indian state of Bihar to understand how choice of primary care provider is influenced by distance, cost and quality of care. This study is based on linked surveys of rural households, PHCs, and private primary care providers conducted in 2019 and 2020. Most rural residents lived in proximity to a primary care provider, though not a qualified one. Within a 5-km distance, 60% of villages had a PHC, 90% had an informal provider, 35% an Indian systems of medicine practitioner, and 10% a private MBBS doctor. Most patients sought care from informal providers irrespective of PHC distance; only 25% of patients living in the PHC's vicinity sought care there. Reducing distance to the PHC by 1 km marginally increased the likehood of the PHC being selected, and reduced the likelihood of private clinics being selected. Reducing patient's costs at PHCs increased the likelihood of the PHC being selected and reduced the likelihood of private clinics and private hospitals being selected. Improved clinical quality at PHCs had no effect on patient selection of PHCs, private clinics, or hospitals. Illness severity reduced the likelihood of PHCs or private clinics being selected, and increased the likelihood of private hospitals selected. Wealthier patients were marginally more likely to use PHCs, substantially more likely to use private hospitals, and less likely to use private clinics. Expanding PHC network coverage or improving their quality of care is not sufficient to make PHCs more relevant to local health needs. An orientation towards essential public health functions, as well as, a community-centered approach to the organization of primary health care system is necessary.

Indexed as

Primary Health CarePublic SectorDelivery of Health CareGovernmentHumansIndiaVotingBypassingHealth systemsIndiaInformal providersPrimary health careProvider choice

Identifiers

PMID38039764
PMCPMC10828545
OpenAlexW4388686570

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.