ArticleHealth economics review2024
Value for solidarity: a proxy for community understanding and acceptance of the basic principles of community-based health insurance in rural Ethiopia.
Article in Health economics review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSolidarity is an aspect of human association that gives emphasis to the cohesive social bond that holds a group together and is valued and understood by all members of the group. A lack of understanding of the solidarity principle is one of the main reasons for low population coverage in microhealth insurance schemes. This study aimed to examine the extent to which people value solidarity and the factors that explain the differences.
methodsA community-based cross-sectional study was carried out in two districts of northeast Ethiopia among 1232 randomly selected households which have ever been registered in a community-based health insurance scheme. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with household heads using a standardized questionnaire deployed to an electronic data collection platform. Solidarity was measured using three dimensions: income solidarity, risk solidarity, and cost coverage. Principal component analysis was used to construct composite variables, and the reliability of the tools was checked using Cronbach's alpha. A multivariable analysis was performed using the partial proportional odds model to determine the associations between variables. The degree of association was assessed using the odds ratio, and statistical significance was determined at 95% confidence interval.
resultsThree-quarters (75%) of the respondents rated risk solidarity as high, while 70% and 63% rated income solidarity and cost coverage as high, respectively. Place of residence (AOR = 2.23; 95% CI: 1.68, 2.94), wealth index (AOR = 1.51; 95% CI: 1.07, 2.12), self-rated health status (AOR = 1.64; 95% CI: 1.12, 2.40), trust in insurance schemes (AOR = 1.68; 95% CI: 1.22, 2.30), perceived quality of care (AOR = 1.75; 95% CI: 1.33, 2.31) and frequency of outpatient visits (AOR = 2.05; 95% CI: 1.30, 3.24) were significant predictors of value for solidarity.
conclusionsThe community placed greater value for solidarity, indicating community understanding and acceptance of the core principles of microhealth insurance. Administrators of the insurance scheme, health authorities, and other actors should strive to create a transparent management system and improve access to high-quality health care, which will facilitate community acceptance of the insurance scheme and its guiding principles.
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.