↓ Skip to main content

Achieving equity within universal health coverage: a narrative review of progress and resources for measuring success

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

14 tweeters


39 Dimensions

Readers on

177 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.
Achieving equity within universal health coverage: a narrative review of progress and resources for measuring success
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12939-014-0072-8
Pubmed ID

Anna M Rodney, Peter S Hill


Equity should be implicit within universal health coverage (UHC) however, emerging evidence is showing that without adequate focus on measurement of equity, vulnerable populations may continue to receive inadequate or inferior health care. This study undertakes a narrative review which aims to: (i) elucidate how equity is contextualised and measured within UHC, and (ii) describe tools, resources and lessons which will assist decision makers to plan and implement UHC programmes which ensure equity for all. A narrative review of peer-reviewed literature published in English between 2005 and 2013, retrieved from PubMed via the search words, 'universal health coverage/care' and 'equity/inequity' was performed. Websites of key global health organizations were also searched for relevant grey literature. Papers were excluded if they failed to focus on equity (of access, financial risk protection or health outcomes) as well as focusing on one of the following: (i) the impact of UHC programmes, policies or interventions on equity (ii) indicators, measurement, monitoring and/or evaluation of equity within UHC, or (iii) tools or resources to assist with measurement. Eighteen journal articles consisting mostly of secondary analysis of country data and qualitative case studies in the form of commentaries/reviews, and 13 items of grey literature, consisting largely of reports from working groups and expert meetings focusing on defining, understanding and measuring inequity in UHC (including recent drafts of global/country monitoring frameworks) were included. The literature advocates for progressive universalism addressing monetary and non-monetary barriers to access and strengthening existing health systems. This however relies on countries being effectively able to identify and reach disadvantaged populations and estimate unmet need. Countries should assess the new WHO/WB-proposed framework for its ability to adequately track the progress of disadvantaged populations in terms of achieving equitable access, effective coverage and financial risk protection within their own settings. Recently published resources contextualise equity as a measurable component of UHC and propose several useful indicators and frameworks. Country case-studies also provide useful lessons and recommendations for planning and implementing equitable UHC which will assist other countries to consider their own requirements for UHC monitoring and evaluation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Belgium 2 1%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Nepal 1 <1%
Unknown 169 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 20%
Researcher 30 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 4%
Other 29 16%
Unknown 20 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 58 33%
Social Sciences 33 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 12%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 3%
Other 20 11%
Unknown 30 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 04 September 2018.
All research outputs
of 13,465,538 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
of 1,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 212,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,465,538 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. 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 212,193 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them