↓ Skip to main content

Factors contributing to low uptake and renewal of health insurance: a qualitative study in Ghana

Overview of attention for article published in Global Health Research and Policy, November 2016
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 (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Factors contributing to low uptake and renewal of health insurance: a qualitative study in Ghana
Published in
Global Health Research and Policy, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s41256-016-0018-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ama Pokuaa Fenny, Anthony Kusi, Daniel K. Arhinful, Felix Ankoma Asante

Abstract

The effort to expand access to healthcare and reduce health inequalities in many low income countries have meant that many have adopted different levels of social health protection mechanisms. Ghana introduced a National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) in 2005 with the aim of removing previous barriers created by the user fees financing system. Although the NHIS has made health accessible to some category of people, the majority of Ghanaians (60 %) are not enroled on the scheme. Earlier studies have looked at various factors that account for this low uptake. However, we recognise that this qualitative study will nuance the depth of these barriers to enrolment. Minimally structured, qualitative interviews were conducted with key stakeholders at the district, regional and national levels. Focus group discussions were also undertaken at the community level. Using an inductive and content analytic approach, the transcripts were analyzed to identify and define categories that explain low uptake of health insurance. The results are presented under two broad themes: sociocultural and systemic factors. Sociocultural factors identified were 1) vulnerability within certain groups such as the aged and the disabled groups which impeded access to the NHIS 2) cultural and religious norms which discouraged enrolment into the scheme. System-wide factors were 1) inadequate distribution of social infrastructure such as healthcare facilities, 2) weak administrative processes within the NHIS, and 3) poor quality of care. Mapping the interplay of these dynamic relations between the NHIS, its clients and service providers, the study identifies critical factors at the policy-making level, service provider level, and client level (reflective in household and community level institutional arrangements) that affect enrolment in the scheme. Our findings inform a number of potential reforms in the area of distribution of health resources and cost containment to expand coverage, increase choices and meeting the needs of the end user.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 29%
Researcher 11 19%
Student > Bachelor 10 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 5 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 19 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 15%
Social Sciences 9 15%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 7%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 8 14%

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 06 February 2018.
All research outputs
#2,964,423
of 12,470,921 outputs
Outputs from Global Health Research and Policy
#23
of 65 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,508
of 360,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Global Health Research and Policy
#5
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,470,921 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 65 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. 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 360,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 61% of its contemporaries.