这项研究旨在确定整个人口的可及性,尤其是贫民窟人口到现有的医疗设施(HCF)以及地理可达性低的贫民窟社区,最后,为生活在研究区域现有医疗保健设施(HCF)覆盖范围之外的地区的人们提供分析模型。已根据道路网络收集和使用了空间数据,高程,HCF的位置,市政边界,贫民窟点,和各种来源的卫星图像。此外,社会经济变量等非空间数据是从特定时期的问卷调查中收集的。空间分析工具就像近一样,网络分析,并使用ArcGIS平台中的预测分析来检查地理可达性。空间分析的结果表明,研究区域内公共医疗机构中心的分布并未均匀分布。研究区域中84%的区域具有声音空间可达性,旅行时间覆盖范围约为12分钟。然而,在现有贫民窟社区的可及性较低的情况下,16%的地区的旅行时间为12至30分钟。因此,低空间可达性区域需要研究区域的新医疗设施。采用层次分析法(AHP)来寻找建立新医疗机构中心的最佳和有效的位置适用性。AHP分析发现医疗设施的场地适宜性,发现五个主要类别是最合适的(2%),适合(5%),中等(35%),差(54%),在研究区域非常差(4%)。此外,本研究的现实框架有助于衡量任何地理区域的地理可达性和适用性。
This research aims to identify the accessibility of the entire population, especially the slum population to existing healthcare facilities (HCF) as well as the slum neighborhoods having low geographic accessibility, and finally, to provide an analytical model for the people living in areas that are outside the coverage range of existing healthcare facilities (HCF) across the study area. Spatial data has been collected and used based on the road network, elevation, location of HCF, municipal boundary, slum point, and satellite images from various sources. Also, non-spatial data such as socioeconomic variables are collected from questionnaires survey within a particular period. The spatial analysis tool like as near, network analysis, and predictive analysis in the ArcGIS platform was used to examine geographic accessibility. The results of the spatial analysis show that the distribution of public healthcare facility centers in the study area has not been uniformly distributed. Across 84% of areas in the study area have sound spatial accessibility with traveling time coverage is about 12 min. However, 16% of areas have a traveling time of 12 to 30 min under low accessibility with existing slum neighborhoods. Therefore, the low spatial accessibility areas are demanding new healthcare facilities in the study area. The Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) is employed to find the most optimal and efficient locational suitability for building new healthcare facility centers. The finding of AHP analysis for site suitability of healthcare facilities revealed five major classes as most suitable (2%), suitable (5%), moderate (35%), poor (54%), and very poor (4%) in the study area. Moreover, the realistic framework of this study helps to measure geographic accessibility and suitability in any geographical area.