↓ Skip to main content

Community-level effect of the reproductive health vouchers program on out-of-pocket spending on family planning and safe motherhood services in Kenya

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, August 2015
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 (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 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
Community-level effect of the reproductive health vouchers program on out-of-pocket spending on family planning and safe motherhood services in Kenya
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-1000-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francis Obare, Charlotte Warren, Lucy Kanya, Timothy Abuya, Ben Bellows

Abstract

Although vouchers can protect individuals in low-income countries from financial catastrophe and impoverishment arising from out-of-pocket expenditures on healthcare, their effectiveness in achieving this goal depends on whether both service and transport costs are subsidized as well as other factors such as service availability in a given locality and community perceptions about the quality of care. This paper examines the community-level effect of the reproductive health vouchers program on out-of-pocket expenditure on family planning, antenatal, delivery and postnatal care services in Kenya. Data are from two rounds of cross-sectional household surveys in voucher and non-voucher sites. The first survey was conducted between May 2010 and July 2011 among 2,933 women aged 15-49 years while the second survey took place between July and October 2012 among 3,094 women of similar age groups. The effect of the program on out-of-pocket expenditure is determined by difference-in-differences estimation. Analysis entails comparison of changes in proportions, means and medians as well as estimation of multivariate linear regression models with interaction terms between indicators for study site (voucher or non-voucher) and period of study (2010-2011 or 2012). There were significantly greater declines in the proportions of women from voucher sites that paid for antenatal, delivery and postnatal care services at health facilities compared to those from non-voucher sites. The changes were also consistent with increased uptake of the safe motherhood voucher in intervention sites over time. There was, however, no significant difference in changes in the proportions of women from voucher and non-voucher sites that paid for family planning services. The results further show that there were significant differences in changes in the amount paid for family planning and antenatal care services by women from voucher compared to those from non-voucher sites. Although there were greater declines in the average amount paid for delivery and postnatal care services by women from voucher compared to those from non-voucher sites, the difference-in-differences estimates were not statistically significant. The reproductive health vouchers program in Kenya significantly contributed to reductions in the proportions of women in the community that paid out-of-pocket for safe motherhood services at health facilities.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Nigeria 1 <1%
Unknown 111 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 35%
Researcher 15 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Student > Postgraduate 6 5%
Other 19 17%
Unknown 15 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 23 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 17%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 4%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 24 21%

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 01 January 2017.
All research outputs
#1,727,836
of 10,782,532 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#776
of 3,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,237
of 236,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#26
of 146 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 10,782,532 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,553 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 done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 236,616 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 146 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.