↓ Skip to main content

Integrated care reform in urban China: a qualitative study on design, supporting environment and implementation

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
127 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
Integrated care reform in urban China: a qualitative study on design, supporting environment and implementation
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12939-017-0686-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yi Qian, Zhiyuan Hou, Wei Wang, Donglan Zhang, Fei Yan

Abstract

Initiatives on integrated care between hospitals and community health centers (CHCs) have been introduced to transform the current fragmented health care delivery system into an integrated system in China. Up to date no research has analyzed in-depth the experiences of these initiatives based on perspectives from various stakeholders. This study analyzed the integrated care pilot in Hangzhou City by investigating stakeholders' perspectives on its design features and supporting environment, their acceptability of this pilot, and further identifying the enabling and constraining factors that may influence the implementation of the integrated care reform. The qualitative study was carried out based on in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with 50 key informants who were involved in the policy-making process and implementation. Relevant policy documents were also collected for analysis. The pilot in Hangzhou was established as a CHC-led delivery system based on cooperation agreement between CHCs and hospitals to deliver primary and specialty care together for patients with chronic diseases. An innovative learning-from-practice mentorship system between specialists and general practitioners was also introduced to solve the poor capacity of general practitioners. The design of the pilot, its governance and organizational structure and human resources were enabling factors, which facilitated the integrated care reform. However, the main constraining factors were a lack of an integrated payment mechanism from health insurance and a lack of tailored information system to ensure its sustainability. The integrated care pilot in Hangzhou enabled CHCs to play as gate-keeper and care coordinator for the full continuum of services across the health care providers. The government put integrated care a priority, and constructed an efficient design, governance and organizational structure to enable its implementation. Health insurance should play a proactive role, and adopt a shared financial incentive system to support integrated care across providers in the future.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 127 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 14%
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Other 9 7%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 50 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 22 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 17%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 4%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 53 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 November 2017.
All research outputs
#13,220,095
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1,311
of 1,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,047
of 327,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#35
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 327,865 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.