↓ Skip to main content

Urban-rural differences in the association between access to healthcare and health outcomes among older adults in China

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
176 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
165 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
Urban-rural differences in the association between access to healthcare and health outcomes among older adults in China
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12877-017-0538-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xufan Zhang, Matthew E. Dupre, Li Qiu, Wei Zhou, Yuan Zhao, Danan Gu

Abstract

Studies have shown that inadequate access to healthcare is associated with lower levels of health and well-being in older adults. Studies have also shown significant urban-rural differences in access to healthcare in developing countries such as China. However, there is limited evidence of whether the association between access to healthcare and health outcomes differs by urban-rural residence at older ages in China. Four waves of data (2005, 2008/2009, 2011/2012, and 2014) from the largest national longitudinal survey of adults aged 65 and older in mainland China (n = 26,604) were used for analysis. The association between inadequate access to healthcare (y/n) and multiple health outcomes were examined-including instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) disability, ADL disability, cognitive impairment, and all-cause mortality. A series of multivariate models were used to obtain robust estimates and to account for various covariates associated with access to healthcare and/or health outcomes. All models were stratified by urban-rural residence. Inadequate access to healthcare was significantly higher among older adults in rural areas than in urban areas (9.1% vs. 5.4%; p < 0.01). Results from multivariate models showed that inadequate access to healthcare was associated with significantly higher odds of IADL disability in older adults living in urban areas (odds ratio [OR] = 1.58-1.79) and rural areas (OR = 1.95-2.30) relative to their counterparts with adequate access to healthcare. In terms of ADL disability, we found significant increases in the odds of disability among rural older adults (OR = 1.89-3.05) but not among urban older adults. Inadequate access to healthcare was also associated with substantially higher odds of cognitive impairment in older adults from rural areas (OR = 2.37-3.19) compared with those in rural areas with adequate access to healthcare; however, no significant differences in cognitive impairment were found among older adults in urban areas. Finally, we found that inadequate access to healthcare increased overall mortality risks in older adults by 33-37% in urban areas and 28-29% in rural areas. However, the increased risk of mortality in urban areas was not significant after taking into account health behaviors and baseline health status. Inadequate access to healthcare was significantly associated with higher rates of disability, cognitive impairment, and all-cause mortality among older adults in China. The associations between access to healthcare and health outcomes were generally stronger among older adults in rural areas than in urban areas. Our findings underscore the importance of providing adequate access to healthcare for older adults-particularly for those living in rural areas in developing countries such as China.

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 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 165 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 8%
Student > Bachelor 14 8%
Researcher 13 8%
Other 21 13%
Unknown 48 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 28 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 15%
Social Sciences 22 13%
Psychology 6 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 3%
Other 23 14%
Unknown 57 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 01 January 2022.
All research outputs
#7,220,501
of 24,051,764 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#1,753
of 3,318 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,852
of 318,403 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#37
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,051,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,318 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 318,403 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.