ArticleDigital health
The impacts on population health by China's regional health data centers and the potential mechanism of influence.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data-Driven Healthy China Pathway: Evolution, Framework, and Global Implications of National Digital Health Strategic Planning.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: China recently established a series of pilot regional health data centers with a mandate to acquire, consolidate, analyze, and translate data into evidence for health policy decision-making. This experiment with "big data" has the potential to influence population health and is the focus of this study. Methods: This study used national longitudinal survey data from the China Family Panel Studies over the period 2014-2020 to empirically assess the impact of China's establishment of pilot regional health data centers on population health and health inequality. A difference-in-differences model was employed to investigate the policy effect on population health, with additional exploration of possible mechanisms of influence. The corrected concentration index was used to measure health inequality, while Wagstaff decomposition method was applied to examine the marginal influence of the policy effect on health inequality. Results: Overall health status of local residents has improved after the establishment of the pilot regional health data centers. Using mechanism analysis, the findings demonstrated that improvements to population health were driven by promoting healthy lifestyles and innovations in medical practices. Furthermore, due to differences in individual e-health literacy, the pilot centers produced "pro-rich" health inequality where high-income groups benefited more from the establishment of the pilot centers in terms of health than low-income groups. Conclusions: This study has highlighted the potential to improve population health, in general, with the advent of big data centers, but for these benefits be unevenly distributed among the resident population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.