ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2025
Can supplementary private health insurance reduce vulnerability to expected poverty and catastrophic health expenditure in China?
Article in International journal for equity in health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Catastrophic health expenditure and commercial health insurance purchase: evidence from China.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Reducing private health expenditure in Greece: the case for regulated complementary health insurance.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn China, where social health insurance (SHI) covers over 95% of the population, supplementary private health insurance (SPHI) primarily addresses high out-of-pocket (OOP) payments that remain after SHI reimbursements. In line with the policy objective of alleviating the OOP burden, this study aims to evaluate the impact of SPHI on vulnerability to expected poverty (VEP) and catastrophic health expenditure (CHE).
methodsA cross-sectional dataset consisting of 25,568 samples was obtained from the 2023 National Health Service Survey (Shandong). Three-stage feasible generalized least squares (FGLS) method was employed to estimate VEP. CHE was measured by OOP healthcare payments that equalled or exceeded 40% of a household's capacity to pay. To address potential endogeneity issues, the county-level average participation rate of SPHI was used as an instrumental variable (IV). The probit and IV Probit models were applied to assess how SPHI affects VEP and CHE.
resultsAmong respondents covered by SHI, only 13.87% individuals purchased SPHI. Those with SPHI exhibited a 11.96% lower likelihood of VEP and experienced 8.06% fewer instances of CHE compared to those without SPHI. The two-stage least squares regression results indicated that SPHI significantly reduces the likelihood of VEP (coefficient: -2.897, P < 0.01) and CHE (coefficient: -1.930, P < 0.01). Additionally, SPHI provided greater welfare benefits, particularly for older adults, rural residents, and individuals with chronic diseases.
conclusionThe findings suggest that SPHI can significantly contribute to poverty reduction, even among populations already covered by SHI. Therefore, we recommend that other low- and middle-income countries, where SHI serves as the primary insurance system as in China, consider implementing SPHI for vulnerable groups to reduce illness-induced impoverishment.
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.