MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903019509 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0209126

Trends and projections of universal health coverage indicators in Ghana, 1995-2030: A national and subnational study

2019· article· en· W2903019509 on OpenAlexaff
Cherri Zhang, Md. Shafiur Rahman, Md Mizanur Rahman, Alfred Edwin Yawson, Kenji Shibuya

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Systems and Reforms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of Tokyo FoundationUniversity of TokyoUniversity of GhanaMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
KeywordsInequalityNational health insurancePaymentEnvironmental healthActuarial scienceGeographyMedicineBusinessPopulationFinanceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ghana has made significant stride towards universal health coverage (UHC) by implementing the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) in 2003. This paper investigates the progress of UHC indicators in Ghana from 1995 to 2015 and makes future predictions up to 2030 to assess the probability of achieving UHC targets. National representative surveys of Ghana were used to assess health service coverage and financial risk protection. The analyses estimated the coverage of 13 prevention and four treatment service indicators at the national level and across wealth quintiles. In addition, we calculated catastrophic health payments and impoverishment to assess financial hardship and used a Bayesian regression model to estimate trends and future projections as well as the probabilities of achieving UHC targets by 2030. Wealth-based inequalities and regional disparities were also assessed. At the national level, 14 out of the 17 health service indicators are projected to reach the target of 80% coverage by 2030. Across wealth quintiles, inequalities were observed amongst most indicators with richer groups obtaining more coverage than their poorer counterparts. Subnational analysis revealed while all regions will achieve the 80% coverage target with high probabilities for the prevention services, the same cannot be applied to the treatment services. In 2015, the proportion of households that suffered catastrophic health payments and impoverishment at a threshold of 25% non-food expenditure were 1.9% (95%CrI: 0.9-3.5) and 0.4% (95%CrI: 0.2-0.8), respectively. These are projected to reduce to 0.4% (95% CrI: 0.1-1.3) and 0.2% (0.0-0.5) respectively by 2030. Inequality measures and subnational assessment revealed that catastrophic expenditure experienced by wealth quintiles and regions are not equal. Significant improvements were seen in both health service coverage and financial risk protection over the years. However, inequalities across wealth quintiles and regions continue to be cause of concerns. Further efforts are needed to narrow these gaps.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations38
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicHealthcare Systems and ReformsFrench-language works237,207