4.4 Article

Context matters: Where would you be the least worse off in the US if you were uninsured?

期刊

HEALTH POLICY
卷 94, 期 1, 页码 76-83

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.08.010

关键词

Community; Access; Quality; Cost; Latinos; Uninsured

资金

  1. CURA's New Initiatives program
  2. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality [R24HS017003]
  3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [1H75DP001812-01]
  4. AGENCY FOR HEALTHCARE RESEARCH AND QUALITY [R24HS017003] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  5. EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT [K12HD055887] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  6. NATIONAL CENTER FOR CHRONIC DISEASE PREV AND HEALTH PROMO [H75DP001812] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: We examined the health care access, quality, and cost experienced by uninsured Latino mothers in two communities in Minnesota and Texas. These communities differ substantially by the size of the local population without health insurance coverage. Methods: Four focus groups were conducted with uninsured Latino mothers who were caring for at least one child in their household. Seventeen mothers participated in each community. All focus groups were conducted by the same trained staff from a non-profit, community-based research organization. Results: Uninsured Latino mothers in Minnesota rated the quality of health care services in their community to be much higher than their Texas counterparts, but were more likely to emphasize the high costs of care and health insurance coverage. Participants in Texas also described having to go to Mexico to obtain health care services. Conclusions: Policies making provision for health care services to the uninsured are likely to be more effective when they take into account the context or composition of each specific local health care system as well as the financial and non-financial spillovers that these uninsurance-related contexts generate. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据