↓ Skip to main content

Travel distance and sociodemographic correlates of potentially avoidable emergency department visits in California, 2006–2010: an observational study

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 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
Travel distance and sociodemographic correlates of potentially avoidable emergency department visits in California, 2006–2010: an observational study
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12939-015-0158-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brian K Chen, James Hibbert, Xi Cheng, Kevin Bennett

Abstract

Use of the hospital emergency department (ED) for medical conditions not likely to require immediate treatment is a controversial topic. It has been faulted for ED overcrowding, increased expenditures, and decreased quality of care. On the other hand, such avoidable ED utilization may be a manifestation of barriers to primary care access. A random 10% subsample of all ED visits with unmasked variables, or approximately 7.2% of all ED visits in California between 2006 and 2010 are used in the analysis. Using panel data methods, we employ linear probability and fractional probit models with hospital fixed effects to analyze the associations between avoidable ED utilization in California and observable patient characteristics. We also test whether shorter estimated road distances to the hospital ED are correlated with non-urgent ED utilization, as defined by the New York University ED Algorithm. We then investigate whether proximity of a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) is correlated with reductions in non-urgent ED utilization among Medicaid patients. We find that relative to the reference group of adults aged 35-64, younger patients generally have higher scores for non-urgent conditions and lower scores for urgent conditions. However, elderly patients (≥65) use the ED for conditions more likely to be urgent. Relative to male and white patients, respectively, female patients and all identified racial and ethnic minorities use the ED for conditions more likely to be non-urgent. Patients with non-commercial insurance coverage also use the ED for conditions more likely to be non-urgent. Medicare and Medicaid patients who live closer to the hospital ED have higher probability scores for non-emergent visits. However, among Medicaid enrollees, those who live in zip codes with an FQHC within 0.5 mile of the zip code population centroid visit the ED for medical conditions less likely to be non-emergent. These patterns of ED utilization point to potential barriers to care among historically vulnerable groups, observable even when using rough estimates of travel distances and avoidable ED utilization.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 83 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 14 17%
Student > Master 11 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 12%
Researcher 6 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 25 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 13%
Social Sciences 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Arts and Humanities 2 2%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 35 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 19 May 2015.
All research outputs
#12,609,279
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1,227
of 1,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,806
of 262,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#7
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,899 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 262,829 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 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.