↓ Skip to main content

Budgeting based on need: a model to determine sub-national allocation of resources for health services in Indonesia

Overview of attention for article published in Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Budgeting based on need: a model to determine sub-national allocation of resources for health services in Indonesia
Published in
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, August 2012
DOI 10.1186/1478-7547-10-11
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tim Ensor, Hafidz Firdaus, David Dunlop, Alex Manu, Ali Ghufron Mukti, Diah ayu Puspandari, Franz von Roenne, Stephanus Indradjaya, Untung Suseno, Patrick Vaughan

Abstract

Allocating national resources to regions based on need is a key policy issue in most health systems. Many systems utilise proxy measures of need as the basis for allocation formulae. Increasingly these are underpinned by complex statistical methods to separate need from supplier induced utilisation. Assessment of need is then used to allocate existing global budgets to geographic areas. Many low and middle income countries are beginning to use formula methods for funding however these attempts are often hampered by a lack of information on utilisation, relative needs and whether the budgets allocated bear any relationship to cost. An alternative is to develop bottom-up estimates of the cost of providing for local need. This method is viable where public funding is focused on a relatively small number of targeted services. We describe a bottom-up approach to developing a formula for the allocation of resources. The method is illustrated in the context of the state minimum service package mandated to be provided by the Indonesian public health system.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 2 2%
Unknown 118 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 22%
Student > Postgraduate 13 11%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 8%
Lecturer 8 7%
Other 23 19%
Unknown 27 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 23%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 17 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 13 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 10%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 30 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 October 2012.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#357
of 533 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,038
of 187,955 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
#6
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 533 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 187,955 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.