Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 365

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Inequality in the distribution of health resources and health services in China: hospitals versus primary care institutions

Open access
Zhang, Tao, Xu, Yongjian, Ren, Jianping, Sun, Liqi, Liu, Chaojie·2017·International Journal for Equity in Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Equity is one of the major goals of China's recent health system reform. This study aimed to evaluate the equality of the distribution of health resources and health services between hospitals and primary care institutions. METHODS: Data of this study were drawn from the China Health Statistical Year Books. We calculated Gini coefficients based on population size and geographic size, respectively, for the indicators: number of institutions, number of health workers and number of beds; and the concentration index (CI) for the indicators: per capita outpatient visits and annual hospitalization rates. RESULTS: The Gini coefficients against population size ranged between 0.17 and 0.44 in the hospital sector, indicating a relatively good equality. The primary care sector showed a slightly higher level of Gini coefficients (around 0.45) in the number of health workers. However, inequality was evident in the geographic distribution of health resources. The Gini coefficients exceeded 0.7 in the geographic distribution of institutions, health workers and beds in both the hospital and the primary care sectors, indicating high levels of inequality. The CI values of hospital inpatient care and outpatient visits to primary care institutions were small (ranging from -0.02 to 0.02), indicating good wealth-related equality. The CI values of outpatient visits to hospitals ranged from 0.16 to 0.21, indicating a concentration of services towards the richer populations. By contrast, the CI values of inpatient care in primary care institutions ranged from -0.24 to -0.22, indicating a concentration of services towards the poorer populations. The eastern developed region also had a high internal inequality compared with the other less developed regions. CONCLUSION: Significant inequality in the geographic distribution of health resources is evident, despite a more equitable per capita distribution of resources. Richer people are more likely to use well-resourced hospitals for outpatient care. By contrast, poorer people are more likely to use poorly-resourced primary care institutions for inpatient care. There is a risk of the emergence of a two-tiered health care delivery system.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12939-017-0543-9

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 27 references

Cited by

See all 365

Metadata

Authors
Zhang, T., Xu, Y., Ren, J., Sun, L., & Liu, C.
Venue
International Journal for Equity in Health
Published
2017-03-03
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
42-42
ISSN
1475-9276 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2593124197
Cited by
365
References
27
FWCI
33.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Inequality in the distribution of health resources and health services in China: hospitals versus primary care institutions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s12939-017-0543-9
The paper
Zhang, T., Xu, Y., Ren, J., Sun, L., & Liu, C. (2017). Inequality in the distribution of health resources and health services in China: hospitals versus primary care institutions. International Journal for Equity in Health. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-017-0543-9

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.