↓ Skip to main content

Does enrollment status in community-based insurance lead to poorer quality of care? Evidence from Burkina Faso

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
153 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
Does enrollment status in community-based insurance lead to poorer quality of care? Evidence from Burkina Faso
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1475-9276-12-31
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul Jacob Robyn, Till Bärnighausen, Aurélia Souares, Germain Savadogo, Brice Bicaba, Ali Sié, Rainer Sauerborn

Abstract

In 2004, a community-based health insurance (CBI) scheme was introduced in Nouna health district, Burkina Faso, with the objective of improving financial access to high quality health services. We investigate the role of CBI enrollment in the quality of care provided at primary-care facilities in Nouna district, and measure differences in objective and perceived quality of care and patient satisfaction between enrolled and non-enrolled populations who visit the facilities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 153 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 <1%
Bangladesh 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Unknown 149 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 25%
Researcher 23 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 3%
Other 22 14%
Unknown 40 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 25%
Social Sciences 22 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 12%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 11 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 5%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 40 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 23 February 2023.
All research outputs
#2,720,929
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#472
of 2,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,779
of 207,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#4
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,222 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
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 207,263 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.