↓ Skip to main content

Distribution of health care resources in Mongolia using the Gini coefficient

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Distribution of health care resources in Mongolia using the Gini coefficient
Published in
Human Resources for Health, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12960-017-0232-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Oyunchimeg Erdenee, Sekar Ayu Paramita, Chiho Yamazaki, Hiroshi Koyama

Abstract

Attaining the perfect balance of health care resources is probably impracticable; however, it is possible to achieve improvements in the distribution of these resources. In terms of the distribution of health resources, equal access to these resources would make health services available to all people. The aim of this study was to compare the distributions of health care resources in urban, suburban, and rural areas of Mongolia. We compared urban and rural areas using the Mann-Whitney U test and further investigated the distribution equality of physicians, nurses, and hospital beds throughout Mongolia using the Gini coefficient-a common measure of distribution derived from the Lorenz curve. Two indicators were calculated: the distribution per 10 000 population and the distribution per 1000 km(2) area. Urban and rural areas were significantly different only in the distribution of physicians per population. However, in terms of the distribution per area, there were statistical differences in physicians, nurses, and hospital beds. We also found that distributions per population unit were equal, with Gini coefficients for physicians, nurses, and hospital beds of 0.18, 0.07, and 0.06, respectively. Distributions per area unit were highly unequal, with Gini coefficients for physicians, nurses, and hospital beds of 0.74, 0.67, and 0.69, respectively. Although the distributions of health care resources per population were adequate for the population size, a striking difference was found in terms of the distributions per geographical area. Because of the nomadic lifestyle of rural and remote populations in Mongolia, geographical imbalances need to be taken into consideration when formulating policy, rather than simply increasing the number of health care resources.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 21%
Student > Bachelor 3 16%
Student > Master 3 16%
Researcher 2 11%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 47%
Social Sciences 2 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Sports and Recreations 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 3 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 September 2017.
All research outputs
#2,588,841
of 11,779,850 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#309
of 631 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,896
of 264,051 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#13
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,779,850 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 77th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 631 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,051 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.