China Health Review (CHR) - China Health Policy and Management Society (CHPAMS)
Not a member yet
151 research outputs found
Sort by
Resolving and Preventing Medical Disputes in China
Full text linkMedical disputes have been a major issue for the Chinese government. Though Chinese government implemented regulations on handling medical accidents in 2002, annual incidents of medical disputes have dramatically increased from 6,324 cases in 2003 to 115,000 cases in 2014. Several factors led to the medical disputes from the perspectives of patient satisfaction, physician performance and the healthcare system. This paper explores the reasons underlying the complex issue and tangible solutions to address the medical disputes in the future. 医疗纠纷已成为困扰中国的一件大事。尽管中国政府于2002年推行了《医疗事故处理条例(草案)》， 医疗纠纷事件从2003年的6324起急剧上升到2014年的11,5000起。从病人满意度，医生行为和医疗体系等方面看，医疗纠纷并非单一因素造成的。此文剖析了医疗纠纷的成因，并提供了未来解决医疗纠纷的可行方法。
Charting an Inevitable Course: Building Institutional Long-term Care for a Rapidly Aging Population in China
Full text linkThe last 10-20 years have seen a rapid growth of elder care homes across major Chinese cities, primarily in the private sector. Given ongoing demographic shifts, family changes, and profound socioeconomic transformations in China, the rise of institutional elder care seems all but inevitable to meet the growing demand for long-term care of a rapidly aging population. As this new industry expands rapidly, it is imperative for Chinese policymakers to institute a formalized regulatory structure as soon as possible. To this end, building an information infrastructure is essential to enhance regulatory oversight and quality monitoring in Chinese long-term care facilities
INTERVIEW WITH DR. JIN MA, SHANGHAI JIAOTONG UNIVERSITY
Full text linkDr. Jin Ma is the Executive Dean of Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Public Health. In this interview with the China Health Review, conducted by Qi (Harry) Zhang, PhD, (Assistant Professor, Old Dominion University) and Jing Hao, MPH, (Doctoral Candidate, University of Massachusetts, Amherst) in April 2010, Dr. Jin Ma shared his views on China’s Health Care System Reform and ongoing research in Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Public Health
A Brief Introduction to Four National Health Databases in the United States
Full text linkHealth and medical care pervade every aspect of our lives. As the world population ages, an entirely new demographic stress will be put on healthcare systems. Some estimates project healthcare costs in the United States to account for 20% of GDP in the next few years. In comparison, China’s total expenditure on health as a percentage of GDP has risen steadily and it is currently below 6%. However, with the rise of life expectancy, an aging population and higher living standards, health expenditure in China will continue to rise. Another challenge China faces is healthcare system reform to ensure equity and to reduce health disparity. To solve these challenges, accurate collection of health statistics at the national level is needed. In this article, we introduce and compare four national health databases in United States, which are pillars for evaluating national health profile and for formulating national health policies. The four databases are National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). As an example, we illustrate how to derive the prevalence of cholesterol screening from the four databases. Despite differences, the overall distributions follow similar patterns across four datasets. These databases can be linked with other data sources to answer more complicated questions in health and healthcare. We hope that this article can draw the attention of Chinese health researchers and policymakers on the importance of health surveillance and can lead to more discussions and interest on how China can benefit from the U.S. experience in conducting health surveillance at the national level
Heterogeneity in Treatment Effect and Comparative Effectiveness Research
Full text linkThe ultimate goal of comparative effectiveness research (CER) is to develop and disseminate evidence-based information about which interventions are most effective for which patients under what circumstances. To achieve this goal it is crucial that researchers in methodology development find appropriate methods for detecting the presence and sources of heterogeneity in treatment effect (HTE). Comparing with the typically reported average treatment effect (ATE) in randomized controlled trials and non-experimental (i.e., observational) studies, identifying and reporting HTE better reflect the nature and purposes of CER. Methodologies of CER include meta-analysis, systematic review, design of experiments that encompasses HTE, and statistical correction of various types of estimation bias, which is the focus of this review
