Healthcare Disparities among Socioeconomic Groups

Abdi Sharmake
{"title":"Healthcare Disparities among Socioeconomic Groups","authors":"Abdi Sharmake","doi":"10.47941/ijhss.1889","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This study sought to explore the socioeconomic factors contributing to disparities in healthcare access and outcomes. \nMethodology: The study adopted a desktop research methodology. Desk research refers to secondary data or that which can be collected without fieldwork. Desk research is basically involved in collecting data from existing resources hence it is often considered a low cost technique as compared to field research, as the main cost is involved in executive’s time, telephone charges and directories. Thus, the study relied on already published studies, reports and statistics. This secondary data was easily accessed through the online journals and library. \nFindings: The findings reveal that there exists a contextual and methodological gap relating to healthcare disparities among socioeconomic groups. Preliminary empirical review revealed that individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds faced multiple barriers to healthcare access, leading to inequalities in health outcomes. The study highlighted the complex interplay between social factors such as income, education, and wealth, emphasizing the need for comprehensive, multisectoral approaches to address healthcare disparities. Despite progress, gaps in research, policy, and practice remained, underscoring the importance of continued efforts to achieve health equity through collaborative initiatives and evidence-based interventions. \nUnique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy: The Social Determinants of Health theory, Health Benefit model and Critical Medical Anthropology theory may be used to anchor future studies on healthcare disparities among socioeconomic groups. The study provided comprehensive recommendations to advance theory, practice, and policy. It contributed to theoretical frameworks by highlighting the complex interplay between socioeconomic factors and healthcare disparities. In practice, it emphasized the importance of patient-centered care and collaborative models to address social determinants of health. Policy recommendations focused on structural interventions to improve social and economic conditions and expand healthcare coverage. Capacity building efforts aimed to enhance skills and competencies, while improved data collection and monitoring systems were advocated for tracking progress. Finally, a research agenda prioritized understanding the mechanisms underlying disparities and evaluating intervention effectiveness. These recommendations aimed to promote health equity and ensure equitable access to healthcare services.","PeriodicalId":513171,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Humanity and Social Sciences","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Humanity and Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47941/ijhss.1889","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study sought to explore the socioeconomic factors contributing to disparities in healthcare access and outcomes. Methodology: The study adopted a desktop research methodology. Desk research refers to secondary data or that which can be collected without fieldwork. Desk research is basically involved in collecting data from existing resources hence it is often considered a low cost technique as compared to field research, as the main cost is involved in executive’s time, telephone charges and directories. Thus, the study relied on already published studies, reports and statistics. This secondary data was easily accessed through the online journals and library. Findings: The findings reveal that there exists a contextual and methodological gap relating to healthcare disparities among socioeconomic groups. Preliminary empirical review revealed that individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds faced multiple barriers to healthcare access, leading to inequalities in health outcomes. The study highlighted the complex interplay between social factors such as income, education, and wealth, emphasizing the need for comprehensive, multisectoral approaches to address healthcare disparities. Despite progress, gaps in research, policy, and practice remained, underscoring the importance of continued efforts to achieve health equity through collaborative initiatives and evidence-based interventions. Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy: The Social Determinants of Health theory, Health Benefit model and Critical Medical Anthropology theory may be used to anchor future studies on healthcare disparities among socioeconomic groups. The study provided comprehensive recommendations to advance theory, practice, and policy. It contributed to theoretical frameworks by highlighting the complex interplay between socioeconomic factors and healthcare disparities. In practice, it emphasized the importance of patient-centered care and collaborative models to address social determinants of health. Policy recommendations focused on structural interventions to improve social and economic conditions and expand healthcare coverage. Capacity building efforts aimed to enhance skills and competencies, while improved data collection and monitoring systems were advocated for tracking progress. Finally, a research agenda prioritized understanding the mechanisms underlying disparities and evaluating intervention effectiveness. These recommendations aimed to promote health equity and ensure equitable access to healthcare services.
社会经济群体之间的医疗差距
目的:本研究旨在探究导致医疗服务获取和结果差异的社会经济因素。研究方法:本研究采用案头研究方法。案头研究指的是二手数据或无需实地调查即可收集到的数据。案头研究基本上是从现有资源中收集数据,因此,与实地研究相比,案头研究通常被认为是一种低成本技术,因为主要成本涉及执行人员的时间、电话费和目录。因此,本研究依赖于已出版的研究、报告和统计数据。这些二手数据可通过在线期刊和图书馆轻松获取。研究结果:研究结果表明,在社会经济群体之间的医疗差距方面存在着背景和方法上的差距。初步的实证审查显示,社会经济背景较差的个人在获得医疗保健服务方面面临多重障碍,导致了健康结果的不平等。研究强调了收入、教育和财富等社会因素之间复杂的相互作用,强调需要采取全面、多部门的方法来解决医疗差距问题。尽管取得了进展,但在研究、政策和实践方面仍然存在差距,这突出表明了通过合作倡议和循证干预措施继续努力实现健康公平的重要性。对理论、实践和政策的独特贡献:健康的社会决定因素 "理论、"健康效益模型 "和 "关键医学人类学 "理论可用于今后对社会经济群体间医疗差距的研究。该研究为推进理论、实践和政策提供了全面的建议。它通过强调社会经济因素与医疗差距之间复杂的相互作用,为理论框架做出了贡献。在实践中,它强调了以患者为中心的护理和合作模式对解决健康的社会决定因素的重要性。政策建议侧重于结构性干预,以改善社会和经济条件,扩大医疗保健覆盖面。能力建设工作旨在提高技能和能力,同时提倡改进数据收集和监测系统,以跟踪进展情况。最后,研究议程优先考虑了解造成差异的机制和评估干预措施的有效性。这些建议旨在促进健康公平,确保公平获得医疗保健服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信