Panel analysis reveals that population aging does not significantly affect regional medical spatial imbalance, indicating that healthcare infrastructure allocation remains largely rigid.
This study examines changes in medical spatial imbalance across 17 metropolitan cities and provinces in South Korea from 2015 to 2024 and investigates its relationship with population aging.Medical spatial imbalance was measured using the Structural Variation Coefficient (SVC), and the analysis combined σ-dispersion, fixed-effects panel regression, first-difference models, and time-series comparisons of representative regions.The results reveal four major findings.First, regional aging trajectories differed according to settlement characteristics, including stagnating (Sejong), slow-growth (Jeonnam), moderate-growth (Ulsan, Busan), and rapid-growth (Daegu) patterns.Second, although the coefficient of variation of SVC declined over the study period, indicating limited σ-convergence, the average SVC increased slightly, suggesting that regional disparities narrowed while overall medical spatial imbalance persisted.Third, neither the level nor the rate of change in population aging had a statistically significant effect on medical spatial imbalance.This finding implies that the allocation of medical resources has not responded sufficiently to rapidly changing demographic demand and remains largely constrained by existing infrastructure.Finally, comparisons of representative regions showed that differences in medical spatial imbalance are closely associated with urban development, settlement structure, and regional spatial characteristics rather than population aging alone.These findings suggest that medical spatial imbalance cannot be explained solely by population aging and highlight the need for region-specific medical resource allocation strategies that reflect local spatial characteristics and healthcare demand.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ning-Xue et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: