IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v128y2015icp301-308.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

It takes a giraffe to see the big picture – Citizens' view on decision makers in health care rationing

Author

Listed:
  • Broqvist, Mari
  • Garpenby, Peter

Abstract

Previous studies show that citizens usually prefer physicians as decision makers for rationing in health care, while politicians are downgraded. The findings are far from clear-cut due to methodological differences, and as the results are context sensitive they cannot easily be transferred between countries. Drawing on methodological experiences from previous research, this paper aims to identify and describe different ways Swedish citizens understand and experience decision makers for rationing in health care, exclusively on the programme level. We intend to address several challenges that arise when studying citizens' views on rationing by (a) using a method that allows for reflection, (b) using the respondents' nomination of decision makers, and (c) clearly identifying the rationing level. We used phenomenography, a qualitative method for studying variations and changes in perceiving phenomena. Open-ended interviews were conducted with 14 Swedish citizens selected by standard criteria (e.g. age) and by their attitude towards rationing.

Suggested Citation

  • Broqvist, Mari & Garpenby, Peter, 2015. "It takes a giraffe to see the big picture – Citizens' view on decision makers in health care rationing," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 301-308.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:128:y:2015:i:c:p:301-308
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.01.043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953615000696
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.01.043?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wiseman, V. & Mooney, G. & Berry, G. & Tang, K. C., 2003. "Involving the general public in priority setting: experiences from Australia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(5), pages 1001-1012, March.
    2. Litva, Andrea & Coast, Joanna & Donovan, Jenny & Eyles, John & Shepherd, Michael & Tacchi, Jo & Abelson, Julia & Morgan, Kieran, 2002. "'The public is too subjective': public involvement at different levels of health-care decision making," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 54(12), pages 1825-1837, June.
    3. Mossialos, Elias & King, Derek, 1999. "Citizens and rationing: analysis of a European survey," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1-2), pages 75-135, September.
    4. Busse, Reinhard, 1999. "Priority-setting and rationing in German health care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1-2), pages 71-90, December.
    5. King, Derek & Maynard, Alan, 1999. "Public opinion and rationing in the United Kingdom," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1-2), pages 39-53, December.
    6. Bowling, Ann & Jacobson, Bobbie & Southgate, Lesley, 1993. "Explorations in consultation of the public and health professionals on priority setting in an inner London health district," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 851-857, October.
    7. Dobrow, Mark J. & Goel, Vivek & Upshur, R. E. G., 2004. "Evidence-based health policy: context and utilisation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 207-217, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thurston, Wilfreda E. & MacKean, Gail & Vollman, Ardene & Casebeer, Ann & Weber, Myron & Maloff, Bretta & Bader, Judy, 2005. "Public participation in regional health policy: a theoretical framework," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(3), pages 237-252, September.
    2. Adele Diederich & Jeannette Winkelhage & Norman Wirsik, 2011. "Age as a Criterion for Setting Priorities in Health Care? A Survey of the German Public View," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(8), pages 1-10, August.
    3. Rosenberg-Yunger, Zahava R.S. & Thorsteinsdóttir, Halla & Daar, Abdallah S. & Martin, Douglas K., 2012. "Stakeholder involvement in expensive drug recommendation decisions: An international perspective," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 226-235.
    4. Abelson, Julia & Forest, Pierre-Gerlier & Eyles, John & Casebeer, Ann & Martin, Elisabeth & Mackean, Gail, 2007. "Examining the role of context in the implementation of a deliberative public participation experiment: Results from a Canadian comparative study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(10), pages 2115-2128, May.
    5. Malcolm Anderson & Jeff Richardson & John McKie & Angelo Iezzi & Munir Khan, 2011. "The Relevance of Personal Characteristics in Health Care Rationing: What the Australian Public Thinks and Why," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(1), pages 131-151, January.
    6. van Exel, Job & Baker, Rachel & Mason, Helen & Donaldson, Cam & Brouwer, Werner, 2015. "Public views on principles for health care priority setting: Findings of a European cross-country study using Q methodology," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 128-137.
    7. Gill, Betty & Griffin, Barbara & Hesketh, Beryl, 2013. "Changing expectations concerning life-extending treatment: The relevance of opportunity cost," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 66-73.
    8. Anabela Botelho & Micaela M. Pinho & Paula Veiga, 2011. "Who and how should participate in health care priority setting? Evidence from a Portuguese survey," NIMA Working Papers 43, Núcleo de Investigação em Microeconomia Aplicada (NIMA), Universidade do Minho.
    9. Rosen, Per, 2006. "Public dialogue on healthcare prioritisation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 107-116, November.
    10. Oddsson, Kristjan, 2003. "Assessing attitude towards prioritizing in healthcare in Iceland," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 135-146, November.
    11. Mossialos, Elias & King, Derek, 1999. "Citizens and rationing: analysis of a European survey," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1-2), pages 75-135, September.
    12. Darker, Catherine D. & Donnelly-Swift, Erica & Whiston, Lucy, 2018. "Demographic factors and attitudes that influence the support of the general public for the introduction of universal healthcare in Ireland: A national survey," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 147-156.
    13. Jane Robertson & Emily J Walkom & David A Henry, 2011. "Health Systems and Sustainability: Doctors and Consumers Differ on Threats and Solutions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(4), pages 1-9, April.
    14. Ir, Por & Bigdeli, Maryam & Meessen, Bruno & Van Damme, Wim, 2010. "Translating knowledge into policy and action to promote health equity: The Health Equity Fund policy process in Cambodia 2000-2008," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 200-209, August.
    15. Blume, Stuart & Tump, Janneke, 2010. "Evidence and policymaking: The introduction of MMR vaccine in the Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(6), pages 1049-1055, September.
    16. Kathryn Oliver & Annette Boaz, 2019. "Transforming evidence for policy and practice: creating space for new conversations," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-10, December.
    17. Knight, Lynn Valerie & Mattick, Karen, 2006. "'When I first came here, I thought medicine was black and white': Making sense of medical students' ways of knowing," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 1084-1096, August.
    18. Alison Bullock & Zoё Slote Morris & Christine Atwell, 2013. "Exchanging knowledge through healthcare manager placements in research teams," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(13-14), pages 1363-1380, October.
    19. Lancry, Pierre-Jean & Sandier, Simone, 1999. "Rationing health care in France," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1-2), pages 23-38, December.
    20. Li, Kathy K. & Abelson, Julia & Giacomini, Mita & Contandriopoulos, Damien, 2015. "Conceptualizing the use of public involvement in health policy decision-making," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 14-21.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:128:y:2015:i:c:p:301-308. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.