Using willingness to pay to investigate regressiveness of user fees in health facilities in Tanzania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study uses data from the Tanzania Human Resources Development Survey (1994) on willingness to pay (WTP) for desired quality of health care at lower-level health facilities to assess potential regressiveness of user fees - a disproportionately higher negative effect of user fees on utilization of health services among the poor compared with the rich. Despite reports of extensive bypassing of the lower-level health facilities in Tanzania, the WTP for quality health care at these health facilities is surprisingly large. WTP was lower among the poor, female and elderly respondents. Almost one-quarter of the poorest 40% of the population was not willing to pay even when the quality of services met their expectations. The results suggest that: the utilization of health services at lower-level health facilities can be increased by improving the quality of care; and the implementation of uniform user charges in the public facilities may be regressive, adversely affecting utilization among the poor, women and the elderly. An effective system of exemptions and waivers will be required for the very poor who may not be able to pay even when quality of services is improved. The findings of the study have policy implications for the Tanzanian government's recent attempts to expand cost-sharing through community health funds at lower-level health facilities, being introduced since 1998.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".