↓ Skip to main content

Insured Veterans’ Use of VA and Non‐VA Health Care in a Rural State

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Rural Health, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
21 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.
Article details
Title
Insured Veterans’ Use of VA and Non‐VA Health Care in a Rural State
Published in
Journal of Rural Health, August 2016
DOI 10.1111/jrh.12196
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To understand how working-age VA-enrolled veterans with commercial insurance use both VA and non-VA outpatient care, and how rural residence affects dual use, for common diagnoses and procedures. We analyzed VA and non-VA outpatient treatment records for any months during 2005-2010 that New Hampshire veterans ages <65 were simultaneously enrolled in VA health care and commercial insurance (per NH's mandatory claims database). Controlling for covariates, we used analysis of variance to compare urban and rural VA users, non-VA users, and dual users on travel burden, diagnosis counts, duration in outpatient care, and visit frequencies, and logistic regressions to assess whether rural veterans were as likely to be seen for common conditions and procedures. More than half of patients were non-VA users and another third were dual users; rural residents were slightly more likely than urban residents to be dual users. For nearly any common diagnosis or procedure, dual users were more likely to have it at some time during treatment than other patients in either VA or non-VA care, but they seldom had it listed in both care systems. Dual users also were seen most often overall, although within either care system they were seen less often than other patients, particularly if they were rural residents living far from care. Rural residence reduced chances of treatment for a wide variety of conditions, though it also was associated with more musculoskeletal and connective tissue diagnoses. It also reduced chances that patients had some diagnostic and treatment procedures but increased the odds of others that may require fewer visits. Dual users living in rural areas may have less continuity in their health care. Ensuring that rural dual users are identified in primary care should improve access and care coordination.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 29%
Researcher 5 24%
Lecturer 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Unspecified 1 5%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 2 10%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 19%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 10%
Social Sciences 2 10%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Other 4 19%
Unknown 3 14%
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 12 August 2016.
All research outputs
#24,753,303
of 34,360,257 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Rural Health
#1,014
of 1,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#227,665
of 335,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Rural Health
#20
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,360,257 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,272 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 335,210 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.