Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38279165›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

A step closer towards achieving universal health coverage: the role of gender in enrolment in health insurance in India.

Susanne Ziegler, Swati Srivastava, Divya Parmar, Sharmishtha Basu, Nishant Jain, Manuela De Allegri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

6 authors.

Susanne ZieglerHeidelberg Institute of Global Health, Medical Faculty and University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. susanne.ziegler@uni-heidelberg.de.
Swati SrivastavaHeidelberg Institute of Global Health, Medical Faculty and University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Divya ParmarDepartment of Population Health Sciences, School of Life Course and Population Sciences, King's College London, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, United Kingdom.
Sharmishtha BasuDeutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, B5/1 Safdarjung Enclave, 110029, New Delhi, India.
Nishant JainDeutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, B5/1 Safdarjung Enclave, 110029, New Delhi, India.
Manuela De AllegriHeidelberg Institute of Global Health, Medical Faculty and University Hospital, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is limited understanding of how universal health coverage (UHC) schemes such as publicly-funded health insurance (PFHI) benefit women as compared to men. Many of these schemes are gender-neutral in design but given the existing gender inequalities in many societies, their benefits may not be similar for women and men. We contribute to the evidence by conducting a gender analysis of the enrolment of individuals and households in India's national PFHI scheme, Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana (RSBY).

methodsWe used data from a cross-sectional household survey on RSBY eligible families across eight Indian states and studied different outcome variables at both the individual and household levels to compare enrolment among women and men. We applied multivariate logistic regressions and controlled for several demographic and socio-economic characteristics.

resultsAt the individual level, the analysis revealed no substantial differences in enrolment between men and women. Only in one state were women more likely to be enrolled in RSBY than men (AOR: 2.66, 95% CI: 1.32-5.38), and this pattern was linked to their status in the household. At the household level, analyses revealed that female-headed households had a higher likelihood to be enrolled (AOR: 1.36, 95% CI: 1.14-1.62), but not necessarily to have all household members enrolled.

conclusionFindings are surprising in light of India's well-documented gender bias, permeating different aspects of society, and are most likely an indication of success in designing a policy that did not favour participation by men above women, by mandating spouse enrolment and securing enrolment of up to five family members. Higher enrolment rates among female-headed households are also an indication of women's preferences for investments in health, in the context of a conducive policy environment. Further analyses are needed to examine if once enrolled, women also make use of the scheme benefits to the same extent as men do. India is called upon to capitalise on the achievements of RSBY and apply them to newer schemes such as PM-JAY.

Indexed as

SexismUniversal Health InsuranceCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansIndiaInsurance, HealthMaleGenderHealth insuranceIndiaRSBYUniversal health coverage

Identifiers

PMID38279165
PMCPMC10821565

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.