What Does the Public Prefer Versus What Is the Public Ready to Forgo?

Author:

Kaplan Giora1,Connelly Yaron12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Gertner Institute for Epidemiology and Health Policy Research, Tel Hasomer, Israel

2. ICET—The Israeli Center for Emerging Technologies in Healthcare, Zerifin, Israel

Abstract

The present study uses a novel approach to assess the publics’ ability to cope with priority setting and rationing in health care by asking what the public is willing to forego. Items for disinvestment were presented in three separated dimensions: Categories of medical care, quality of service, and items representing social values. A telephone survey was conducted among a representative sample of the Israeli public (N = 609). The response rate was 51%. We identify a few items that a high proportion of the population express readiness to forgo: a drug for smoking cessation, budgets for improving appearance and comfort in medical facilities, and a product for preventing surgical scars. Furthermore, over a quarter of the public was ready to forgo many other items. We found that less than 10% justified their selection in terms of “personally not important to me,” while most respondents evaluated the items they chose to forgo as “less effective or less essential in comparison to others.” The study found that most respondents, when exposed to a range of health system components, were able to identify at least one item that they will be willing to forgo in a time of economic crisis.

Funder

Israel National Institute for Health Policy Research

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Policy

Reference24 articles.

1. Americans’ Health Priorities: Curing Cancer And Controlling Costs

2. Health care rationing: the public's debate

3. Explorations in consultation of the public and health professionals on priority setting in an inner London health district

4. Broqvist M. (2018). Asking the public: Citizens’ views on priority setting and resource allocation in democratically governed healthcare [Doctoral dissertation, Linköping University Electronic Press].

5. Trends in Telephone Outcomes, 2008–2015

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3