ArticlePloS one2025
The capacity and influencing factors of primary health care services in China.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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
objectiveTo analyze the capacity and influencing factors of primary health care services and to provide a scientific basis for promoting the development of primary health care services in China.
methodsThe entropy weight technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) and rank‒sum ratio (RSR) methods, which are based on the health resource density index (HRDI), were used to analyze the capacity of primary health care services, and multiple stepwise regression analysis was used to analyze the influencing factors.
resultsTaking the HRDI of primary health care service capacity in 2021 as a reference, the six evaluation indicators of 14 regions, including Hebei, Liaoning, and Shanghai, were higher than the Chinese average. According to the entropy weight TOPSIS method, the average C-values of primary health care service capacity in China from 2017-2021 were 0.303, 0.313, 0.324, 0.331, and 0.326, respectively, with the C-values of regions such as Shanghai, Beijing, and Henan ranking in the top ten, whereas those of regions such as Xinjiang, Qinghai, and Tibet ranked in the bottom five. According to grade divisions by the RSR method, Tianjin, Shandong, Jiangsu, Shanghai, and Beijing were ranked at the good grade level; Xinjiang, Qinghai, Inner Mongolia, and Tibet at the poor grade level; and the remaining 22 regions at the medium grade level. According to the multivariate stepwise regression, population density, health technicians, and the number of beds per 1,000 people were the main factors affecting the capacity of primary health care services in China.
conclusionThe overall capacity of primary health care services in China is not high, and regional disparities are substantial. The capacity of primary health care services is better in Tianjin, Shandong, Jiangsu, Shanghai and Beijing and worse in Xinjiang, Qinghai, Inner Mongolia and Tibet. The population density and number of health technicians per 1,000 people are the main factors affecting the capacity of primary health care services in China.
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.