↓ Skip to main content

Healthcare seeking behaviour among self-help group households in Rural Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, India

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
78 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 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
Healthcare seeking behaviour among self-help group households in Rural Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, India
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-1254-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wameq A. Raza, Ellen Van de Poel, Pradeep Panda, David Dror, Arjun Bedi

Abstract

In recent years, supported by non-governmental organizations (NGOs), a number of community-based health insurance (CBHI) schemes have been operating in rural India. Such schemes design their benefit packages according to local priorities. This paper examines healthcare seeking behaviour among self-help group households with a view to understanding the implications for the benefit packages offered by such schemes. We use cross-sectional data collected from two of India's poorest states and estimate an alternative-specific conditional logit model to examine healthcare seeking behaviour. We find that the majority of respondents do access some form of care and that there is overwhelming use of private providers. Non-degree allopathic providers (NDAP) also called rural medical practitioners are the most popular providers. In the case of acute illnesses, proximity plays an important role in determining provider choice. For chronic illnesses, cost of care influences provider choice. Given the importance of proximity in determining provider choice, benefit packages offered by CBHI schemes should consider coverage of transportation costs and reimbursement of foregone earnings.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 131 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 16%
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Postgraduate 9 7%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 26 20%
Unknown 25 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 25 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 16%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 14 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 6%
Other 20 15%
Unknown 32 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 21 November 2017.
All research outputs
#5,892,638
of 22,837,982 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,685
of 7,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,728
of 393,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#35
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,837,982 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,638 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 393,289 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 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.