IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v222y2019icp246-255.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Equal access for equal need: Eliciting public preferences for access to health treatment by employment status

Author

Listed:
  • Gibbs, Naomi
  • Powell, Philip A.
  • Tsuchiya, Aki

Abstract

The National Health Service in the UK is set up under the principle of “equal access for equal need”, where those with identical medical needs should be given equal priority in receiving health care. However, non-medical needs may also be relevant in health care decision-making. This paper considers how members of the general public value access to a health service given equal medical needs, where some service users have additional non-medical needs. There are three primary research questions. First, are public preferences regarding access to a health care service symmetric and inequality averse? Second, are public preferences asymmetric across different needs groups? And third, which individual characteristics of respondents are predictive of different public preferences in this domain? An online survey of the UK general public was conducted in January 2017 using binary choice questions. The hypothetical scenarios involved allocating extra resources from a social perspective, to reduce the waiting time to access a mental health service for the unemployed, for the employed, or for both groups. Based on a valid sample of 662 respondents, the study found that the three main preference categories were: inequality averse and symmetric, inequality averse and asymmetric in favour of the unemployed, and inequality seeking and asymmetric in favour of the unemployed, with the first group being the largest. Respondents’ current labour market status was found to explain their preferences so that those who were currently job-seeking were more likely to demonstrate preferences that favoured the unemployed, and those who were currently unemployed were less likely to demonstrate asymmetric preferences that favoured the employed. The implications from these findings are that health policies in the UK that support equal access for equal medical need are likely to be received most favourably, yet a non-trivial minority may support policies favouring those with other, non-medical needs.

Suggested Citation

  • Gibbs, Naomi & Powell, Philip A. & Tsuchiya, Aki, 2019. "Equal access for equal need: Eliciting public preferences for access to health treatment by employment status," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 246-255.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:222:y:2019:i:c:p:246-255
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.01.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953619300036
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.01.003?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. Dolan, Paul & Tsuchiya, Aki, 2009. "The social welfare function and individual responsibility: Some theoretical issues and empirical evidence," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 210-220, January.
    2. Abasolo, Ignacio & Tsuchiya, Aki, 2004. "Exploring social welfare functions and violation of monotonicity: an example from inequalities in health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 313-329, March.
    3. George Loewenstein, 2000. "Emotions in Economic Theory and Economic Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 426-432, May.
    4. Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
    5. Aki Tsuchiya & Verity Watson, 2017. "Re‐Thinking ‘The Different Perspectives That can be Used When Eliciting Preferences in Health’," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(12), pages 103-107, December.
    6. Ignacio Abásolo & Aki Tsuchiya, 2013. "Is more health always better for society? Exploring public preferences that violate monotonicity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 539-563, April.
    7. Abasolo, Ignacio & Tsuchiya, Aki, 2004. "Exploring social welfare functions and violation of monotonicity: an example from inequalities in health--a reply to Jan Abel Olsen," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 333-334, March.
    8. Dolan, Paul & Tsuchiya, Aki, 2009. "Corrigendum to "The social welfare function and individual responsibility: Some theoretical issues and empirical evidence" [J. Health Econ. 28 (2009) 210-220]," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 758-759, May.
    9. Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
    10. Culyer, A. J. & Wagstaff, Adam, 1993. "Equity and equality in health and health care," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 431-457, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Máté Sándor Deák & Gábor Csató & György Pápai & Viktor Dombrádi & Attila Nagy & Csilla Nagy & Attila Juhász & Klára Bíró, 2021. "Investigating the Geographic Disparities of Amenable Mortality and Related Ambulance Services in Hungary," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-8, January.

    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. Matthew Robson & Miqdad Asaria & Richard Cookson & Aki Tsuchiya & Shehzad Ali, 2017. "Eliciting the Level of Health Inequality Aversion in England," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(10), pages 1328-1334, October.
    2. Gu, Yuanyuan & Lancsar, Emily & Ghijben, Peter & Butler, James RG & Donaldson, Cam, 2015. "Attributes and weights in health care priority setting: A systematic review of what counts and to what extent," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 41-52.
    3. McNamara, Simon & Tsuchiya, Aki & Holmes, John, 2021. "Does the UK-public's aversion to inequalities in health differ by group-labelling and health-gain type? A choice-experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 269(C).
    4. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F. & l’Haridon, Olivier & Pinto, Jose Luis, 2015. "Estimating sign-dependent societal preferences for quality of life," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 229-243.
    5. Richard Cookson & Shehzad Ali & Aki Tsuchiya & Miqdad Asaria, 2018. "E‐learning and health inequality aversion: A questionnaire experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(11), pages 1754-1771, November.
    6. Aki Tsuchiya, 2012. "Distributional Judgements in the Context of Economic Evaluation," Chapters, in: Andrew M. Jones (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Health Economics, Second Edition, chapter 38, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Thomas Kourouxous & Thomas Bauer, 2019. "Violations of dominance in decision-making," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 209-239, April.
    8. Mæstad, Ottar & Norheim, Ole Frithjof, 2012. "A universal preference for equality in health? Reasons to reconsider properties of applied social welfare functions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(10), pages 1836-1843.
    9. Oded Stark & Fryderyk Falniowski & Marcin Jakubek, 2017. "Consensus Income Distribution," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 63(4), pages 899-911, December.
    10. Ignacio Abásolo & Aki Tsuchiya, 2013. "Egalitarianism and Altruism in Health: To What Extent Are They Related?," Working Papers 2013003, The University of Sheffield, Department of Economics.
    11. Arthur E. Attema & Han Bleichrodt & Peter P. Wakker, 2012. "A Direct Method for Measuring Discounting and QALYs More Easily and Reliably," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(4), pages 583-593, July.
    12. Simon McNamara & John Holmes & Abigail K. Stevely & Aki Tsuchiya, 2020. "How averse are the UK general public to inequalities in health between socioeconomic groups? A systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(2), pages 275-285, March.
    13. Kruse, Tobias & Atkinson, Giles, 2022. "Understanding public support for international climate adaptation payments: Evidence from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    14. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:5:p:988-1014 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Rolf Aaberge & Magne Mogstad, 2006. "On the Definition and Measurement of Chronic Poverty," ICER Working Papers 36-2006, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    16. Manuel A. Utset, 2023. "Time-Inconsistent Bargaining and Cross-Commitments," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-21, April.
    17. Maria Alessandra Antonelli & Valeria De Bonis & Angelo Castaldo & Alessandrao Gandolfo, 2022. "Sin goods taxation: an encompassing model," Public Finance Research Papers 52, Istituto di Economia e Finanza, DSGE, Sapienza University of Rome.
    18. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    19. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    20. Shehzad Ali & Aki Tsuchiya & Miqdad Asaria & Richard Cookson, 2017. "How Robust Are Value Judgments of Health Inequality Aversion? Testing for Framing and Cognitive Effects," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 37(6), pages 635-646, August.
    21. repec:jdm:journl:v:17:y:2022:i:5:p:988-1014 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Paolo Li Donni & Vito Peragine & Giuseppe Pignataro, 2014. "Ex‐Ante And Ex‐Post Measurement Of Equality Of Opportunity In Health: A Normative Decomposition," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 182-198, February.

    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:222:y:2019:i:c:p:246-255. 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.