4.6 Review

The effects of MDR-TB Treatment Regimens through Socioeconomic and Spatial characteristics on Environmental-Health Outcomes: Evidence from Chinese Hospitals

期刊

ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT
卷 34, 期 4, 页码 1081-1093

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0958305X221079425

关键词

MDR-TB; environmental-health outcome; socioeconomic and spatial factors; survival analysis; china

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examines the impact of socioeconomic and spatial factors on the outcomes of environmental health through the treatment of multi-drug resistance tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in China. The findings suggest that patient survival rates are not affected by the treatment department. Spatial characteristics of time and medical expenditure are significantly correlated with environmental health results. However, travel expenditures and male gender are negatively associated with environmental health outcomes.
This study examines socioeconomic and spatial factors and its influences on the outcomes of environmental-health through multi-drug resistance tuberculosis (MDR-TB) treatment regimes in China. For this purpose, a survival analysis is conducted by applying multivariable Cox Proportional Hazard model on secondary data starts from 2010 to 2019. The data set is consisting of six hundred and fifty five (655) TB patients from different hospitals of China. The findings of this study indicate us that there is no alteration in patient survival rates between the two treatment departments, hospital and ambulatory care. The spatial characteristics of time expenditure and medical expenditure are significantly correlated with supporting distance bias methods and environmental health results. On the other side, travel expenditures and male gender results show negatively associated with the environmental-health outcome. This study reveals with these remarks that Ministry of Health, China should take serious actions to control MDR-TB and launch a comprehensive policy with the help of WHO recommendation.

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

4.6
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