↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Investigating the health care delivery system in Japan and reviewing the local public hospital reform

Overview of attention for article published in Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#28 of 159)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
Title
Investigating the health care delivery system in Japan and reviewing the local public hospital reform
Published in
Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, March 2016
DOI 10.2147/rmhp.s93285
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xing Zhang, Tatsuo Oyama

Abstract

Japan's health care system is considered one of the best health care systems in the world. Hospitals are one of the most important health care resources in Japan. As such, we investigate Japanese hospitals from various viewpoints, including their roles, ownership, regional distribution, and characteristics with respect to the number of beds, staff, doctors, and financial performance. Applying a multivariate analysis and regression model techniques, we show the functional differences between urban populated prefectures and remote ones; the equality gap among all prefectures with respect to the distribution of the number of beds, staff, and doctors; and managerial differences between private and public hospitals. We also review and evaluate the local public hospital reform executed in 2007 from various financial aspects related to the expenditure and revenue structure by comparing public and private hospitals. We show that the 2007 reform contributed to improving the financial situation of local public hospitals. Strategic differences between public and private hospitals with respect to their management and strategy to improve their financial situation are also quantitatively analyzed in detail. Finally, the remaining problems and the future strategy to further improve the Japanese health care system are described.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 27%
Student > Master 15 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Researcher 4 6%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 13 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 23 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 17 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 18 December 2019.
All research outputs
#1,818,468
of 14,554,924 outputs
Outputs from Risk Management and Healthcare Policy
#28
of 159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,305
of 264,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Risk Management and Healthcare Policy
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,554,924 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 159 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 264,030 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.