MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789475861 · doi:10.1002/hpm.2505

Examining the association between exposure to mass media and health insurance enrolment in Ghana

2018· article· en· W2789475861 on OpenAlexaff
Moses Mosonsieyiri Kansanga, Joseph Asumah Braimah, Roger Antabe, Yuji Sano, Emmanuel Kyeremeh, Isaac Luginaah

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Health Planning and Management · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNational Health Interview SurveyMass mediaOddsLogistic regressionEnvironmental healthMedicineNational health insuranceDemographySocioeconomicsAdvertisingBusinessSociologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although previous studies have explored the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) in Ghana, very little attention is paid to the influence of mass media exposure on NHIS enrolment. Yet, understanding this linkage is important, particularly due to the critical role of mass media in disseminating health information and shaping people's health perceptions and choices. Using data from the 2014 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey, we employed logistic regression analysis to understand the relationship between NHIS enrolment and exposure to print media, radio, and television. Our findings indicate that women with more exposure to radio (OR = 1.23, P < 0.01) and television (OR = 1.24, P < 0.01) were more likely to enroll in the NHIS than those with no exposure. For men, more exposure to print media was associated with higher odds of enrolling in the NHIS (OR = 1.41, P < 0.01). In conclusion, all 3 types of media may be helpful in promoting NHIS enrolment in Ghana. However, given that the relationship between media exposure and enrolment in the NHIS was gendered, we recommend that policymakers should pay attention to these dynamics to ensure effective targeting in NHIS media campaigns for increased enrolment into the scheme.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.113
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Health Planning and ManagementSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207