Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Israel Journal of Health Policy Research 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Original research article

Personal needs versus national needs: public attitudes regarding health care priorities at the personal and national levels

Authors: Giora Kaplan, Orna Baron-Epel

Published in: Israel Journal of Health Policy Research | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Many stakeholders have little or no confidence in the ability of the public to express their opinions on health policy issues. The claim often arises that lay people prioritize according to their own personal experiences and may lack the broad perspective necessary to understand the needs of the population at large. In order to test this claim empirically, this study compares the public’s priorities regarding personal insurance to their priorities regarding allocation of national health resources. Thus, the study should shed light on the extent to which the public’s priorities at the national level are a reflection of their priorities at the personal level.

Methods

A telephone survey was conducted with a representative sample of the Israeli adult population aged 18 and over (n = 1,225). The public’s priorities were assessed by asking interviewees to assume that they were the Minister of Health and from this point of view allocate an additional budget among various health areas. Their priorities at the personal level were assessed by asking interviewees to choose preferred items for inclusion in their personal supplementary health insurance.

Results

Over half of the respondents (54%) expressed different personal and national priorities. In multivariable logistic analysis, “population group” was the only variable found to be statistically significant; Jews were 1.8 times more likely than Arabs to give a similar response to both questions. Income level was of borderline significance.

Conclusions

At least half of the population was able to differentiate between their personal needs and national policy needs. We do not advocate a decision-making process based on polls or referendums. However, we believe that people should be allowed to express their priorities regarding national policy issues, and that decision-makers should consider these as one of the factors used to determine policy decisions.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Mitton C, Smith N, Peacock S, Evoy B, Abelson J. Public participation in health care priority setting: A scoping review. Health Policy. 2009;91:219–28.CrossRefPubMed Mitton C, Smith N, Peacock S, Evoy B, Abelson J. Public participation in health care priority setting: A scoping review. Health Policy. 2009;91:219–28.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Office S. Designed to Care: Renewing the National Health Service in Scotland. Edinburgh: Scottish Office; 1997. Office S. Designed to Care: Renewing the National Health Service in Scotland. Edinburgh: Scottish Office; 1997.
3.
go back to reference Doyal L. The rationing debate. Rationing within the NHS should be explicit: the case for. Br Med J. 1997;314:1114–8.CrossRef Doyal L. The rationing debate. Rationing within the NHS should be explicit: the case for. Br Med J. 1997;314:1114–8.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Jordan J, Dowswell T, Harrison S, Lilford R, Mort M. Whose priorities? Listening to users and the public. Br Med J. 1998;316:1668–70.CrossRef Jordan J, Dowswell T, Harrison S, Lilford R, Mort M. Whose priorities? Listening to users and the public. Br Med J. 1998;316:1668–70.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Mechanic D. Dilemmas in rationing health-care services: the case for implicit rationing. Br Med J. 1995;310:1655–9.CrossRef Mechanic D. Dilemmas in rationing health-care services: the case for implicit rationing. Br Med J. 1995;310:1655–9.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Herbst S. How State-Level Policy Managers “Read” Public Opinion. In: Manza J, Cook FL, Page BI, editors. Navigating Public Opinion – Polls, Policy and the Future of American Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.; 2002. Herbst S. How State-Level Policy Managers “Read” Public Opinion. In: Manza J, Cook FL, Page BI, editors. Navigating Public Opinion – Polls, Policy and the Future of American Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.; 2002.
7.
go back to reference Kull S, Ramsay C. How Policymakers Misperceive U.S. Public Opinion on Foreign Policy. In: Manza J, Cook FL, Page BI, editors. Navigating Public Opinion – Polls, Policy and the Future of American Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc; 2002. Kull S, Ramsay C. How Policymakers Misperceive U.S. Public Opinion on Foreign Policy. In: Manza J, Cook FL, Page BI, editors. Navigating Public Opinion – Polls, Policy and the Future of American Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc; 2002.
8.
go back to reference Lee T. The Sovereign Status of Survey Data. In: Manza J, Cook FL, Page BI, editors. Navigating Public Opinion – Polls, Policy and the Future of American Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.; 2002. Lee T. The Sovereign Status of Survey Data. In: Manza J, Cook FL, Page BI, editors. Navigating Public Opinion – Polls, Policy and the Future of American Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.; 2002.
9.
go back to reference Baron J. Biases in the quantitative measurement of values for public decisions. Psychol Bull. 1997;1997(122):72–88.CrossRef Baron J. Biases in the quantitative measurement of values for public decisions. Psychol Bull. 1997;1997(122):72–88.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Kinder DR, Kiewiet DR. Economic Discontent and Political Behavior: The Role of Personal Grievances and Collective Economic Judgments in Congressional Voting. Am J Polit Sci 1979. 1979;23(3):495–527.CrossRef Kinder DR, Kiewiet DR. Economic Discontent and Political Behavior: The Role of Personal Grievances and Collective Economic Judgments in Congressional Voting. Am J Polit Sci 1979. 1979;23(3):495–527.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Ostrom E. A Behavioral Approach to the Rational Choice Theory of Collective Action: Presidential Address, American Political Science Association, 1997. Am Polit Sci Rev. 1998;92:1–22.CrossRef Ostrom E. A Behavioral Approach to the Rational Choice Theory of Collective Action: Presidential Address, American Political Science Association, 1997. Am Polit Sci Rev. 1998;92:1–22.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Feldman S. Economic Self-Interest and Political Behavior. Am J Polit Sci. 1982;26:446–66.CrossRef Feldman S. Economic Self-Interest and Political Behavior. Am J Polit Sci. 1982;26:446–66.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Lynch J, Gollust SE. Playing Fair: Fairness Beliefs and Health Policy Preferences in the United States. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2010;35(6):849–87.CrossRefPubMed Lynch J, Gollust SE. Playing Fair: Fairness Beliefs and Health Policy Preferences in the United States. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2010;35(6):849–87.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Kirkpatrick SA. Political attitudes and behavior: Some consequences of attitudinal ordering. Midwest J Polit Sci. 1970;14(1):1–24.CrossRef Kirkpatrick SA. Political attitudes and behavior: Some consequences of attitudinal ordering. Midwest J Polit Sci. 1970;14(1):1–24.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Simon HA. Human Nature in Politics: The Dialogue of Psychology with Political Science. Am Polit Sci Rev. 1985;79:293–304.CrossRef Simon HA. Human Nature in Politics: The Dialogue of Psychology with Political Science. Am Polit Sci Rev. 1985;79:293–304.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Ajzen I. Attitudes, Personality, and Behavior. Berkshire, England: Open University Press, McGraw-Hill Education; 2005. Ajzen I. Attitudes, Personality, and Behavior. Berkshire, England: Open University Press, McGraw-Hill Education; 2005.
18.
go back to reference Kaplan, G. and Baron-Epel, O. The public’s priorities in health services. Health Expectations 2013, doi:10.1111/hex.12064. Kaplan, G. and Baron-Epel, O. The public’s priorities in health services. Health Expectations 2013, doi:10.1111/hex.12064.
19.
go back to reference Raghunathan TE, Grizzle JE. A split questionnaire survey design. J Am Stat Assoc. 1995;90:54–63.CrossRef Raghunathan TE, Grizzle JE. A split questionnaire survey design. J Am Stat Assoc. 1995;90:54–63.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Houseman EA, Milton DK. Partial questionnaire designs, questionnaire non-response, and attributable fraction: Applications to adult onset asthma. Stat Med. 2006;25:1499–519.CrossRefPubMed Houseman EA, Milton DK. Partial questionnaire designs, questionnaire non-response, and attributable fraction: Applications to adult onset asthma. Stat Med. 2006;25:1499–519.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Bowling A, Jacobson B, Southgate L. Health services priorities. Explorations in consulting of the public and health professionals on priority settings in an inner London health district. Soc Sci Med. 1993;37:851–7.CrossRefPubMed Bowling A, Jacobson B, Southgate L. Health services priorities. Explorations in consulting of the public and health professionals on priority settings in an inner London health district. Soc Sci Med. 1993;37:851–7.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Bawn K. Constructing “Us”: Ideology, Coalition Politics, and False Consciousness. Am J Polit Sci. 1999;43(2):303–34.CrossRef Bawn K. Constructing “Us”: Ideology, Coalition Politics, and False Consciousness. Am J Polit Sci. 1999;43(2):303–34.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Personal needs versus national needs: public attitudes regarding health care priorities at the personal and national levels
Authors
Giora Kaplan
Orna Baron-Epel
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Israel Journal of Health Policy Research / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 2045-4015
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-015-0010-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Israel Journal of Health Policy Research 1/2015 Go to the issue