↓ Skip to main content

Examining equity in health insurance coverage: an analysis of Ghana’s National Health Insurance Scheme

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, June 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
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
252 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
Examining equity in health insurance coverage: an analysis of Ghana’s National Health Insurance Scheme
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12939-018-0793-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fidelia A. A. Dake

Abstract

Following years of out-of-pocket payment for healthcare, some countries in Africa including Ghana, Kenya and Rwanda have instituted social health protection programs through health insurance to provide access to quality and affordable healthcare especially for the poor. This paper examines equity in coverage under Ghana's National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS). Secondary data from the 2008 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey based on an analytical sample of 4821 females (15-49 years) and 4568 males (15-59 years) were analysed using descriptive, bivariate and multivariate methods. Concentration curves and indices were used to examine equity in coverage on the NHIS. As at 2008, more than 60% of Ghanaians aged 15-59 years were not covered under the NHIS with slightly more females (38.9%) than males (29.7%) covered. Coverage was highest among the highly educated, professionals, those from households in the richest wealth quintile and urban residents. Lack of coverage was most concentrated among the poor. Universal coverage under the NHIS is far from being achieved with marked exclusion of the poor. There is the need for deliberate action to enrol the poor under the NHIS.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 252 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 55 22%
Researcher 25 10%
Student > Bachelor 25 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 7%
Student > Postgraduate 13 5%
Other 35 14%
Unknown 81 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 37 15%
Social Sciences 21 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 15 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 14 6%
Other 37 15%
Unknown 89 35%
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 19 June 2018.
All research outputs
#4,137,050
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#766
of 1,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,267
of 328,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#30
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 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 1,933 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 328,114 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 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.