↓ Skip to main content

Factores asociados a la no utilización de los servicios formales de prestación en salud en la población peruana: análisis de la Encuesta Nacional de Hogares (ENAHO) 2015

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
Factores asociados a la no utilización de los servicios formales de prestación en salud en la población peruana: análisis de la Encuesta Nacional de Hogares (ENAHO) 2015
Published in
Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública, October 2017
DOI 10.17843/rpmesp.2017.343.2864
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vicente A Benites-Zapata, Michelle Lozada-Urbano, Diego Urrunaga-Pastor, Edith Márquez-Bobadilla, Enrique Moncada-Mapelli, Edward Mezones-Holguín

Abstract

The aim of the study was to estimate the prevalence of non-use of health services (NUHS) and its associated factors using the National Household Survey (ENAHO 2015). The participants were defined as NUHS if they have presented any symptoms, discomfort, illness, relapse of chronic illness or accident during the last month and did not go to the health services. 35036 participants were analyzed; the prevalence of NUHS was 53,9%. NUHS was higher in the coastal region (adjusted Prevalence Ratio [aPR]=1.24;95%CI:1.17-1.31), highlands (aPR=1.38; 95%CI: 1.31-1.46) and jungle (aPR=1.25,95%CI:1.18-1.33) compared to Lima. Likewise, there were a higher prevalence of NUHS in participants without health insurance (aPR=1.59;95%CI:1.52-1.66) and those affiliated to Ministry of Health insurance (aPR=1.16;95%CI:1.11-1.22) compared to those affiliated to Social Security. More than half of the participants suffered from NUHS, which was associated with geographical and health system conditions. It is required evidenced-informed public policies to improve this situation.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 23%
Researcher 5 19%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Librarian 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 10 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 15%
Arts and Humanities 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 8%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 14 54%
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 05 February 2018.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública
#370
of 458 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#292,994
of 333,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública
#8
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 458 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 333,675 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.