ArticleHeliyon2024
Unraveling the drivers of inequality in primary health-care resource distribution: Evidence from Guangzhou, China.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structural Inequalities in Ambulatory Care: A Scoping Review of Access and Quality and the Neglected Dimension of Patient Safety.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Research on the equity of health manpower resource allocation in the Yangtze River Delta region.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Comparative Analysis and Spatial Distribution of the Primary Health Care Centers and Health Manpower Across Saudi Arabia Using Shapiro-Wilk Test.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
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
Background: Primary health-care (PHC) resource plays a critical role in addressing challenges related to healthcare accessibility and costs, as well as implementing a graded diagnosis and treatment system. This study aims to analyze the extent and components of inequality in PHC resource allocation in Guangzhou. Methods: By utilizing data from the Annual Report on Healthcare Institutions for community and township health centers in Guangzhou from 2012 to 2020, this paper analyses the distribution of human, material and financial resources. It examines inequities in health resource allocation using the Gini coefficient. Additionally, it investigates the internal structure of overall inequality through the two-stage nested Theil decomposition method and explores the influencing mechanisms of inequality using the concentration index decomposition method. Results: The findings indicate that between 2012 and 2020, except for beds in 2018 and 2019, the Gini coefficients for resource allocation relative to population size remained below 0.3. Moreover, the Gini coefficient for geographical area ranged from 0.1228 to 0.3481. The two-stage nested Theil decomposition results reveal that within-district disparity contributes the most to the overall inequality, exceeding 46 %. The Concentration indexes show negative values, and the decomposition analysis highlights the significant contribution of the number of individuals served (over 72 %) to the inequality in health resource allocation. Conclusion: At the administrative district level, the allocation of PHC resources in Guangzhou demonstrates overall equity, with within-district inequality identified as the primary contributor to the overall inequality. The distribution of PHC resources in Guangzhou follows a pro-poor pattern. The key factors influencing equity enhancement in PHC resource allocation in Guangzhou include the number of individuals served, the presence of township health centers among institution types, the number of hospital admissions per capita, and the proportion of children aged 0-3.
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.