↓ Skip to main content

Impoverishing effects of catastrophic health expenditures in Malawi

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, January 2017
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 (77th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
185 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
Impoverishing effects of catastrophic health expenditures in Malawi
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12939-017-0515-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martina Mchenga, Gowokani Chijere Chirwa, Levison S. Chiwaula

Abstract

Out of pocket (OOP) health spending can potentially expose households to risk of incurring large medical bills, and this may impact on their welfare. This work investigates the effect of catastrophic OOP on the incidence and depth of poverty in Malawi. The paper is based on data that was collected from 12,271 households that were interviewed during the third Malawi integrated household survey (IHS-3). The paper considered a household to have incurred a catastrophic health expenditure if the share of health expenditure in the household's non-food expenditure was greater than a given threshold ranging between 10 and 40%. As we increase the threshold from 10 to 40%, we found that OOP drives between 9.37 and 0.73% of households into catastrophic health expenditure. The extent by which households exceed a given threshold (mean overshoot) drops from 1.01% of expenditure to 0.08%, as the threshold increased. When OOP is accounted for in poverty estimation, additional 0.93% of the population is considered poor and the poverty gap rises by almost 2.54%. Our analysis suggests that people in rural areas and middle income households are at higher risk of facing catastrophic health expenditure. We conclude that catastrophic health expenditure increases the incidence and depth of poverty in Malawi. This calls for the introduction of social insurance system to minimize the incidence of catastrophic health expenditure especially to the rural and middle income population.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 185 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 46 25%
Researcher 13 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 7%
Student > Bachelor 12 6%
Lecturer 11 6%
Other 28 15%
Unknown 62 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 33 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 11%
Social Sciences 15 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 4%
Other 11 6%
Unknown 67 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 07 October 2022.
All research outputs
#4,439,072
of 23,917,011 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#836
of 2,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,027
of 423,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#15
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,917,011 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,020 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 423,079 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 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 62% of its contemporaries.