IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i24p16461-d997178.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring Chinese Elderly’s Trust in the Healthcare System: Empirical Evidence from a Population-Based Survey in China

Author

Listed:
  • Lu Chen

    (School of Journalism and Communication, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, China)

  • Miaoting Cheng

    (Department of Educational Technology, Faculty of Education, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China)

Abstract

This research aims to investigate how much the Chinese elderly trust the healthcare system and the critical factors that influence their trust. We use data from the China Social Survey (CSS) collected by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in the year 2019 to examine how demographic factors, social-economic status, internet access, and perceptions of the healthcare system impact the Chinese elderly’s trust in the healthcare system. Our research finds male gender, high educational level, and having internet access are negatively related to the elderly’s trust in the healthcare system. Our research also reveals that the elderly’s trust in the healthcare system was significantly related to their subjective perception of their social–economic status, upward mobility, and perception of accessibility and affordability rather than other objective indicators such as income and financial protection. The results imply that the elderly have a pessimistic expectation of their subjective social status and future possibilities of upward mobility in their later life, which deepens their distrust of the health system. Additionally, the accessibility and affordability of the healthcare system have remained problematic among the Chinese elderly. The study provides important theoretical and practical implications to enhance the elderly’s trust in the healthcare system.

Suggested Citation

  • Lu Chen & Miaoting Cheng, 2022. "Exploring Chinese Elderly’s Trust in the Healthcare System: Empirical Evidence from a Population-Based Survey in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-16, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:24:p:16461-:d:997178
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/24/16461/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/24/16461/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gong, Yingli & Wang, Hongwei & Xia, Qiangwei & Zheng, Lijuan & Shi, Yunxiang, 2021. "Factors that determine a Patient's willingness to physician selection in online healthcare communities: A trust theory perspective," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    2. Lianjie Wang & Yao Tang & Farnaz Roshanmehr & Xiao Bai & Farzad Taghizadeh-Hesary & Farhad Taghizadeh-Hesary, 2021. "The Health Status Transition and Medical Expenditure Evaluation of Elderly Population in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(13), pages 1-14, June.
    3. Shan Lu & Yan Zhang & Yadong Niu & Liang Zhang, 2018. "Exploring Medical Expenditure Clustering and the Determinants of High-Cost Populations from the Family Perspective: A Population-Based Retrospective Study from Rural China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-14, November.
    4. Pengfei Zhang & Jinghua Gao, 2021. "Quality of public health insurance and individuals’ consumption structure upgrades: evidence from China," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Tan, Si Ying & Wu, Xun & Yang, Wei, 2019. "Impacts of the type of social health insurance on health service utilisation and expenditures: implications for a unified system in China," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 468-486, October.
    6. Yunsong Chen & Mark Williams, 2018. "Subjective Social Status in Transitioning China: Trends and Determinants," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 99(1), pages 406-422, March.
    7. Qin Zhou & Qing He & Karen Eggleston & Gordon G Liu, 2022. "Urban-rural health insurance integration in china: impact on health care utilization, financial risk protection, and health status," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(22), pages 2491-2509, May.
    8. Tian Lu & Yunjie (Calvin) Xu & Scott Wallace, 2018. "Internet usage and patient's trust in physician during diagnoses: A knowledge power perspective," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(1), pages 110-120, January.
    9. Wang, Hufeng & Gusmano, Michael K. & Cao, Qi, 2011. "An evaluation of the policy on community health organizations in China: Will the priority of new healthcare reform in China be a success?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 37-43, January.
    10. Michael Siegrist & George Cvetkovich, 2000. "Perception of Hazards: The Role of Social Trust and Knowledge," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(5), pages 713-720, October.
    11. Dahai Zhao & Hongyu Zhao & Paul D. Cleary, 2019. "International variations in trust in health care systems," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1), pages 130-139, January.
    12. Zhou, Zhongliang & Zhao, Yaxin & Shen, Chi & Lai, Sha & Nawaz, Rashed & Gao, Jianmin, 2021. "Evaluating the effect of hierarchical medical system on health seeking behavior: A difference-in-differences analysis in China," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 268(C).
    13. Xiang Zou & Ruth Fitzgerald & Jing-Bao Nie, 2020. "“Unworthy of Care and Treatment”: Cultural Devaluation and Structural Constraints to Healthcare-Seeking for Older People in Rural China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-13, March.
    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. Visschers, Vivianne H.M. & Siegrist, Michael, 2012. "Fair play in energy policy decisions: Procedural fairness, outcome fairness and acceptance of the decision to rebuild nuclear power plants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 292-300.
    2. Dongjing Chen & Xiaotong Guo, 2023. "Impact of the Digital Economy and Financial Development on Residents’ Consumption Upgrading: Evidence from Mainland China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-25, May.
    3. Filimonau, Viachaslau & Högström, Michaela, 2017. "The attitudes of UK tourists to the use of biofuels in civil aviation: An exploratory study," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 84-94.
    4. Kang, Min Jung & Park, Heejun, 2011. "Impact of experience on government policy toward acceptance of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles in Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3465-3475, June.
    5. Nicolás Bronfman & Pamela Cisternas & Esperanza López-Vázquez & Luis Cifuentes, 2016. "Trust and risk perception of natural hazards: implications for risk preparedness in Chile," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 81(1), pages 307-327, March.
    6. Fangye Du & Jiaoe Wang & Haitao Jin, 2021. "Whether Public Hospital Reform Affects the Hospital Choices of Patients in Urban Areas: New Evidence from Smart Card Data," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-14, July.
    7. Ann Bostrom & Ragnar E. Löfstedt, 2003. "Communicating Risk: Wireless and Hardwired," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 241-248, April.
    8. Gisela Wachinger & Ortwin Renn & Sarah-Kristina Wist & Sinika-Marie Steinhilber & Ulrike Triemer, 2014. "Using participation to create resilience: how to involve citizens in designing a hospital system?," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 208-223, June.
    9. Brianne Suldovsky & William K. Hallman, 2022. "The National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard of 2016: Intersection of Technology and Public Understanding of Science in the United States," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-15, September.
    10. Fung, Timothy K.F. & Choi, Doo Hun & Scheufele, Dietram A. & Shaw, Bret R., 2014. "Public opinion about biofuels: The interplay between party identification and risk/benefit perception," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 344-355.
    11. Yawson, Robert M. & Kuzma, Jennifer, 2010. "Evidence review and experts’ opinion on consumer acceptance of agrifood nanotechnology," MPRA Paper 40807, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Qi, Wen-Hui & Qi, Ming-Liang & Ji, Ya-Min, 2020. "The effect path of public communication on public acceptance of nuclear energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    13. Nahui Zhen & Jon Barnett & Michael Webber, 2020. "Is Trust Always a Precondition for Effective Water Resource Management?," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(4), pages 1423-1436, March.
    14. Visschers, Vivianne H.M. & Keller, Carmen & Siegrist, Michael, 2011. "Climate change benefits and energy supply benefits as determinants of acceptance of nuclear power stations: Investigating an explanatory model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3621-3629, June.
    15. Rita Saleh & Angela Bearth & Michael Siegrist, 2019. "“Chemophobia” Today: Consumers’ Knowledge and Perceptions of Chemicals," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(12), pages 2668-2682, December.
    16. Kazuya Nakayachi & George Cvetkovich, 2010. "Public Trust in Government Concerning Tobacco Control in Japan," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1), pages 143-152, January.
    17. Yan Lu & Yuqi Zhou & Pengling Liu & Shiyun Zhang, 2022. "A Study on the Influence of the Income Structure on the Consumption Structure of Rural Residents in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-13, August.
    18. Andrew Knight, 2007. "Intervening Effects of Knowledge, Morality, Trust, and Benefits on Support for Animal and Plant Biotechnology Applications," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(6), pages 1553-1563, December.
    19. Kévin Nadarajah & Laurent Brun & Stéphanie Bordel & Emeline Ah-Tchine & Anissa Dumesnil & Antoine Marques Mourato & Jacques Py & Laurent Jammes & Xavier Arnauld De Sartre & Alain Somat, 2024. "A Three-Stage Psychosocial Engineering-Based Method to Support Controversy and Promote Mutual Understanding between Stakeholders: The Case of CO 2 Geological Storage," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-15, February.
    20. Gianluca Stefani & Alessio Cavicchi & Donato Romano & Alexandra E. Lobb, 2008. "Determinants of intention to purchase chicken in Italy: the role of consumer risk perception and trust in different information sources," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 523-537.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:24:p:16461-:d:997178. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.