↓ Skip to main content

Does spending matters? Re-looking into various covariates associated with Out of Pocket Expenditure (OOPE) and catastrophic spending on accidental injury from NSSO 71st round data

Overview of attention for article published in Health Economics Review, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 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 spending matters? Re-looking into various covariates associated with Out of Pocket Expenditure (OOPE) and catastrophic spending on accidental injury from NSSO 71st round data
Published in
Health Economics Review, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13561-017-0177-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jalandhar Pradhan, Rinshu Dwivedi, Sanghamitra Pati, Sarit Kumar Rout

Abstract

Accidental Injury is a traumatic event which not only influences physical, psychological, and social wellbeing of the households but also exerts extensive financial burden on them. Despite the devastating economic burden of injuries, in India, there is limited data available on injury epidemiology. This paper aims to, first, examine the socio-economic differentials in Out of Pocket Expenditure (OOPE) on accidental injury; second, to look into the level of Catastrophic Health Expenditure (CHE) at different threshold levels; and last, to explore the adjusted effect of various socio-economic covariates on the level of CHE. Data was extracted from the key indicators of social consumption in India: Health, National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO), conducted by the Government of India during January-June-2014. Logistic regression analysis was employed to analyse the various covariates of OOPE and CHE associated to accidental injury. Binary Logistic analysis has demonstrated a significant association between socioeconomic status of the households and the level of OOPE and CHE on accidental injury care. People who used private health services incurred 16 times higher odds of CHE than those who availed public facilities. The result shows that if the person is covered via any type of insurance, the odd of CHE was lower by about 28% than the uninsured. Longer duration of stay and death due to accidental injury was positively associated with higher level of OOPE. Economic status, nature of healthcare facility availed and regional affiliation significantly influence the level of OOPE and CHE. Despite numerous efforts by the Central and State governments to reduce the financial burden of healthcare, large number of households are still paying a significant amount from their own pockets. There are huge differentials in cost for the treatment among public and private healthcare providers for accidental injury. It is expected that the findings would provide insights into the prevailing magnitude of accidental injuries in India, the profile of the population affected, and the level of OOPE among households.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 79 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 18%
Student > Master 13 16%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 11%
Other 6 8%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 16 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 18%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 10 13%
Social Sciences 8 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 8%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 20 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 December 2017.
All research outputs
#15,486,175
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from Health Economics Review
#262
of 436 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,249
of 440,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Economics Review
#9
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 436 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. 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 440,645 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.