↓ Skip to main content

Community-level effect of the reproductive health vouchers program on out-of-pocket spending on family planning and safe motherhood services in Kenya

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, August 2015
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 (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
144 Mendeley
Title
Community-level effect of the reproductive health vouchers program on out-of-pocket spending on family planning and safe motherhood services in Kenya
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-1000-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francis Obare, Charlotte Warren, Lucy Kanya, Timothy Abuya, Ben Bellows

Abstract

Although vouchers can protect individuals in low-income countries from financial catastrophe and impoverishment arising from out-of-pocket expenditures on healthcare, their effectiveness in achieving this goal depends on whether both service and transport costs are subsidized as well as other factors such as service availability in a given locality and community perceptions about the quality of care. This paper examines the community-level effect of the reproductive health vouchers program on out-of-pocket expenditure on family planning, antenatal, delivery and postnatal care services in Kenya. Data are from two rounds of cross-sectional household surveys in voucher and non-voucher sites. The first survey was conducted between May 2010 and July 2011 among 2,933 women aged 15-49 years while the second survey took place between July and October 2012 among 3,094 women of similar age groups. The effect of the program on out-of-pocket expenditure is determined by difference-in-differences estimation. Analysis entails comparison of changes in proportions, means and medians as well as estimation of multivariate linear regression models with interaction terms between indicators for study site (voucher or non-voucher) and period of study (2010-2011 or 2012). There were significantly greater declines in the proportions of women from voucher sites that paid for antenatal, delivery and postnatal care services at health facilities compared to those from non-voucher sites. The changes were also consistent with increased uptake of the safe motherhood voucher in intervention sites over time. There was, however, no significant difference in changes in the proportions of women from voucher and non-voucher sites that paid for family planning services. The results further show that there were significant differences in changes in the amount paid for family planning and antenatal care services by women from voucher compared to those from non-voucher sites. Although there were greater declines in the average amount paid for delivery and postnatal care services by women from voucher compared to those from non-voucher sites, the difference-in-differences estimates were not statistically significant. The reproductive health vouchers program in Kenya significantly contributed to reductions in the proportions of women in the community that paid out-of-pocket for safe motherhood services at health facilities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Nigeria 1 <1%
Unknown 143 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 48 33%
Researcher 17 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Student > Bachelor 7 5%
Other 23 16%
Unknown 29 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 27 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 26 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 16%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 4%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 39 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 06 November 2017.
All research outputs
#4,868,446
of 23,674,309 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,301
of 7,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,778
of 268,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#31
of 148 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,674,309 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,899 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 268,645 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 148 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.