↓ Skip to main content

Contracting with private providers for primary care services: evidence from urban China

Overview of attention for article published in Health Economics Review, January 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 (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Contracting with private providers for primary care services: evidence from urban China
Published in
Health Economics Review, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/2191-1991-3-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yan Wang, Karen Eggleston, Zhenjie Yu, Qiong Zhang

Abstract

Controversy surrounds the role of the private sector in health service delivery, including primary care and population health services. China's recent health reforms call for non-discrimination against private providers and emphasize strengthening primary care, but formal contracting-out initiatives remain few, and the associated empirical evidence is very limited. This paper presents a case study of contracting with private providers for urban primary and preventive health services in Shandong Province, China. The case study draws on three primary sources of data: administrative records; a household survey of over 1600 community residents in Weifang and City Y; and a provider survey of over 1000 staff at community health stations (CHS) in both Weifang and City Y. We supplement the quantitative data with one-on-one, in-depth interviews with key informants, including local officials in charge of public health and government finance.We find significant differences in patient mix: Residents in the communities served by private community health stations are of lower socioeconomic status (more likely to be uninsured and to report poor health), compared to residents in communities served by a government-owned CHS. Analysis of a household survey of 1013 residents shows that they are more willing to do a routine health exam at their neighborhood CHS if they are of low socioeconomic status (as measured either by education or income). Government and private community health stations in Weifang did not statistically differ in their performance on contracted dimensions, after controlling for size and other CHS characteristics. In contrast, the comparison City Y had lower performance and a large gap between public and private providers. We discuss why these patterns arose and what policymakers and residents considered to be the main issues and concerns regarding primary care services.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 46 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 4 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 8%
Other 10 21%
Unknown 10 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 42%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 10 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 04 December 2014.
All research outputs
#3,695,894
of 22,751,628 outputs
Outputs from Health Economics Review
#60
of 421 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,147
of 284,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Economics Review
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,751,628 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 421 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 284,805 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.