↓ Skip to main content

A study on the equality and benefit of China’s national health care system

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
A study on the equality and benefit of China’s national health care system
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12939-017-0653-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shaoguo Zhai, Pei Wang, Quanfang Dong, Xing Ren, Jiaoli Cai, Peter C. Coyte

Abstract

This study is designed to evaluate whether the benefit which the residents received from the national health care system is equal in China. The perceived equality and benefit are used to measure the personal status of health care system, health status. This study examines variations in perceived equality and benefit of the national health care system between urban and rural residents from five cities of China and assessed their determinants. One thousand one hundred ninty eight residents were selected from a random survey among five nationally representative cities. The research characterizes perceptions into four population groupings based on a binary assessment of survey scores: high equality & high benefit; low equality & low benefit; high equality & low benefit; and low equality & high benefit. The distribution of the four groups above is 30.4%, 43.0%, 4.6% and 22.0%, respectively. Meanwhile, the type of health insurance, educational background, occupation, geographic regions, changes in health status and other factors have significant impacts on perceived equality and benefit derived from the health care system. The findings demonstrate wide variations in perceptions of equality and benefit between urban and rural residents and across population characteristics, leading to a perceived lack of fairness in benefits and accessibility. Opportunities exist for policy interventions that are targeted to eliminate perceived differences and promote greater equality in access to health care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 18%
Student > Master 9 18%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 15 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 9 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 12%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 16 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 July 2018.
All research outputs
#14,362,315
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1,446
of 1,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,494
of 315,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#48
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 315,948 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.