↓ Skip to main content

Revisiting out-of-pocket requirements: trends in spending, financial access barriers, and policy in ten high-income countries

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 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
Revisiting out-of-pocket requirements: trends in spending, financial access barriers, and policy in ten high-income countries
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12913-018-3185-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Rice, Wilm Quentin, Anders Anell, Andrew J. Barnes, Pauline Rosenau, Lynn Y. Unruh, Ewout van Ginneken

Abstract

Countries rely on out-of-pocket (OOP) spending to different degrees and employ varying techniques. The article examines trends in OOP spending in ten high-income countries since 2000, and analyzes their relationship to self-assessed barriers to accessing health care services. The countries are Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Data from three sources are employed: OECD statistics, the Commonwealth Fund survey of individuals in each of ten countries, and country-specific documents on health care policies. Based on trends in OOP spending, we divide the ten countries into three groups and analyze both trends and access barriers accordingly. As part of this effort, we propose a conceptual model for understanding the key components of OOP spending. There is a great deal of variation in aggregate OOP spending per capita spending but there has been convergence over time, with the lowest-spending countries continuing to show growth and the highest spending countries showing stability. Both the level of aggregate OOP spending and changes in spending affect perceived access barriers, although there is not a perfect correspondence between the two. There is a need for better understanding the root causes of OOP spending. This will require data collection that is broken down into OOP resulting from cost sharing and OOP resulting from direct payments (due to underinsurance and lacking benefits). Moreover, data should be disaggregated by consumer groups (e.g. income-level or health status). Only then can we better link the data to specific policies and suggest effective solutions to policy makers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 115 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 17%
Researcher 17 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 6%
Other 5 4%
Student > Postgraduate 5 4%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 44 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 12%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 10 9%
Social Sciences 10 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 46 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 57. 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 09 June 2022.
All research outputs
#736,889
of 25,287,709 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#155
of 8,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,222
of 336,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#9
of 208 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,287,709 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,592 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 336,278 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 208 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.