MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392581028 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4008351/v1

Socioeconomic Inequalities in Out of Pocket and Catastrophic Health Expenditures in Pakistan

2024· preprint· en· W4392581028 on OpenAlexaff
Saima Bashir, Shabana Kishwar, Muhammad Nasir, Shehzad Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Systems and Reforms
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInequalitySocioeconomic statusEconomicsDevelopment economicsEnvironmental healthDemographic economicsMedicineMathematicsPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In Pakistan, health care utilization is linked to out-of-pocket (OOP) payments which has inequitable impact on household finances, leading to a vicious cycle of debt and repayments. In this study, we investigated socioeconomic inequality in OOP and catastrophic health expenditure (CHE), and the contribution of sociodemographic determinants to inequality. Three latest rounds of the Household Integrated Economic Survey (2007-08, 2011-12, and 2018-19) conducted by the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics were used. National and provincial-level socioeconomic inequalities were measured using concentration index (CI), and the slope (SII) and relative (RII) indices of inequality. Decomposition analyses were conducted using the approach proposed by Wagstaff (2005) and Erreygers (2009). We found that OOP payments increased from PKR 127 (2007-8) to PKR 250 (2018-19), with the largest increase observed in Punjab province. The gap in mean OOP payment between socioeconomic quintiles was also the largest in Punjab (2018-19). The percentage experiencing CHE in the most deprived quintile (Q1) changed from 8.3% (2007-8) to 13.7% (2018-9), and for the least deprived quintile (Q5) changed from 5.1% (2007-8) to 8.4% (2018-19). The OOP CI increased from 0.028 to 0.051 between 2007-8 and 2019-18, while SII and RII increased from 0.89 to 1.32 and 1.18 to 1.36, respectively. The CHE CI remained unchanged between 2007-8 and 2018-19, while SII become more positive and RII values became more negative. These findings suggest that the OOP expenditures increased over time for the least deprived group while CHE increased for the most deprived groups. The inequality decomposition analysis found that family size, socioeconomic position, dependency ratio and employment status were key contributing factors. We conclude that poor households should be protected from CHE by decoupling utilization from financing and extending financial risk protection through health insurance.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicHealthcare Systems and ReformsFrench-language works237,207