↓ Skip to main content

Achieving universal health coverage in South Africa through a district health system approach: conflicting ideologies of health care provision

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (58th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
144 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
Achieving universal health coverage in South Africa through a district health system approach: conflicting ideologies of health care provision
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1797-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam Fusheini, John Eyles

Abstract

Universal Health Coverage (UHC) has emerged as a major goal for health care delivery in the post-2015 development agenda. It is viewed as a solution to health care needs in low and middle countries with growing enthusiasm at both national and global levels. Throughout the world, however, the paths of countries to UHC have differed. South Africa is currently reforming its health system with UHC through developing a national health insurance (NHI) program. This will be practically achieved through a decentralized approach, the district health system, the main vehicle for delivering services since democracy. We utilize a review of relevant documents, conducted between September 2014 and December 2015 of district health systems (DHS) and UHC and their ideological underpinnings, to explore the opportunities and challenges, of the district health system in achieving UHC in South Africa. Review of data from the NHI pilot districts suggests that as South Africa embarks on reforms toward UHC, there is a need for a minimal universal coverage and emphasis on district particularity and positive discrimination so as to bridge health inequities. The disparities across districts in relation to health profiles/demographics, health delivery performance, management of health institutions or district management capacity, income levels/socio-economic status and social determinants of health, compliance with quality standards and above all the burden of disease can only be minimised through positive discrimination by paying more attention to underserved and disadavantaged communities. We conclude that in South Africa the DHS is pivotal to health reform and UHC may be best achieved through minimal universal coverage with positive discrimination to ensure disparities across districts in relation to disease burden, human resources, financing and investment, administration and management capacity, service readiness and availability and the health access inequalities are consciously implicated. Yet ideological and practical issues make its achievement problematic.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Unknown 142 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 56 39%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 12%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Researcher 14 10%
Unspecified 14 10%
Other 28 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 21%
Unspecified 18 13%
Social Sciences 17 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 13 9%
Other 27 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 20 June 2017.
All research outputs
#6,005,713
of 11,389,380 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,818
of 3,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,348
of 266,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#56
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,389,380 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 266,807 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 58% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.