↓ Skip to main content

Out-of-Pocket Payments and Subjective Unmet Need of Healthcare

Overview of attention for article published in Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Out-of-Pocket Payments and Subjective Unmet Need of Healthcare
Published in
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40258-017-0331-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erik Schokkaert, Jonas Steel, Carine Van de Voorde

Abstract

We present a critical review of the literature that discusses the link between the level of out-of-pocket payments in developed countries and the share of people in these countries reporting that they postpone or forgo healthcare for financial reasons. We discuss the pros and cons of measuring access problems with this subjective variable. Whereas the quantitative findings in terms of numbers of people postponing care must be interpreted with utmost caution, the picture for the vulnerable groups in society is reasonably robust and unsurprising: people with low incomes and high morbidity and incomplete (or non-existent) insurance coverage are most likely to postpone or forgo healthcare for financial reasons. It is more surprising that people with high incomes and generous insurance coverage also report that they postpone care. We focus on some policy-relevant issues that call for further research: the subtle interactions between financial and non-financial factors, the possibility of differentiation of out-of-pocket payments between patients and between healthcare services, and the normative debate around accessibility and affordability.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 17%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Lecturer 3 6%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 14 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 8 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 15%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 17 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 April 2017.
All research outputs
#18,542,806
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
#615
of 784 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,392
of 309,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
#7
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 784 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 309,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.