↓ Skip to main content

Equity in patient experiences of primary care in community health centers using primary care assessment tool: a comparison of rural-to-urban migrants and urban locals in Guangdong, China

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 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
Equity in patient experiences of primary care in community health centers using primary care assessment tool: a comparison of rural-to-urban migrants and urban locals in Guangdong, China
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12939-018-0758-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chenwen Zhong, Li Kuang, Lina Li, Yuan Liang, Jie Mei, Li Li

Abstract

The equity of rural-to-urban migrants' health care utilization is already on China's agenda. The Chinese government has been embarking on efforts to improve the financial and geographical accessibility of health care for migrants by strengthening primary care services and providing universal coverage. Patient experiences are equally vital to migrants' health care utilization. To our knowledge, no studies have focused on equity in the patient experiences between migrants and locals. Based on a patient survey from Guangdong, China, which has a large number of rural-to-urban migrants, our study assessed the equity in the primary care patient experiences between rural-to-urban migrants and urban locals in the same health insurance context, since different forms of insurance can affect the patient experiences of primary care. We stratified our samples by different insurance types into three layers. We assessed primary care patient experiences using a validated Chinese version of the Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCAT), including eight primary care attributes. A 'PCAT total score' was calculated. Data were collected through face-to-face and one-on-one surveys in 2014. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used for each layer to generate comparable samples between rural-to-urban migrants and urban locals. Based on the matched dataset, a t-test was employed to compare the primary care patient experiences of the two groups. Using PSM, 220 patients in the rural-to-urban migrants group were matched to 220 patients in the urban locals group. After the matching, the observed confounding variables were balanced, and the PCAT scores were almost equal between the two groups. The only slight differences existed in the Urban Employee Basic Medical Insurance layer and in the without basic medical insurance coverage layer. Equity in the primary care patient experiences between rural-to-urban migrants and urban locals seems to have been achieved to some extent. However, there is room for improvement in the equity of coordination of care and comprehensiveness. Policy makers should consider strengthening these two dimensions by integrating the health care system. More attention should be focused on helping migrants break down language and cultural barriers and improving the patient-physician communication process.

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 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 > Master 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Researcher 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 35 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 14%
Social Sciences 8 10%
Psychology 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 36 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 27 April 2018.
All research outputs
#4,126,134
of 23,045,021 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#764
of 1,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,915
of 326,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#26
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,045,021 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,928 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 326,468 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.