Author
Listed:
- Olivier Jacques
- Marion Perrot
- Alexandre Prud'homme
- Carole Vincent
- Roxane Borgès Da Silva
Abstract
Since the creation of Canada’s health care system in the 1960s, certain services have never been deemed “medically necessary” and are therefore excluded from public coverage. This study examines perceptions regarding the expansion of public health insurance coverage to include these services, drawing on a survey conducted in March 2025 with a representative sample of 1,000 individuals. It analyses the level of support for extending the public plan to include coverage for services provided by psychologists, as well as for extending coverage to home care for people with loss of autonomy, dental care, and services provided by optometrists and physiotherapists. The results suggest that support for universal coverage of psychological services is lower than for some currently non-covered services but higher than for others. Coverage for home care for people experiencing a decrease in autonomy receives the strongest support. A majority of respondents report being willing to pay higher taxes or contributions in order for this service to be covered under the public plan. Support for expanding coverage is linked to self-interest and ideological considerations. The more positively individuals perceive their own mental health, the less they believe psychological services should be prioritized. People with more left-leaning political views are more inclined to support extending coverage to include psychological services. Conversely, the more individuals identify with right-leaning political orientations, the less willing they are to pay more to broaden universal health care coverage. Depuis la création du système de santé au Canada dans les années 1960, certains services n’ont jamais été jugés comme « médicalement nécessaires » et sont donc exclus de la couverture publique. Dans cette étude, les auteurs s’intéressent aux perceptions quant à l’élargissement de la couverture des soins et services de santé par le régime public d’assurance maladie en se basant sur un sondage réalisé en mars 2025 auprès d’un échantillon représentatif de 1000 personnes. L’étude examine le degré d’approbation envers une extension du régime public visant à inclure la couverture des soins fournis par les psychologues, mais aussi envers une extension visant à inclure la couverture des soins à domicile pour les personnes en perte d’autonomie, des soins dentaires et des soins fournis par les optométristes et les physiothérapeutes. Les résultats suggèrent que l’appui à une couverture universelle des soins psychologiques est moins élevé que pour certains soins actuellement non couverts, mais plus élevé que pour d’autres. La couverture des soins à domicile pour les personnes en perte d’autonomie est celle qui reçoit la plus grande adhésion et une majorité de répondants se déclare prête à payer davantage de taxes ou d’impôts pour que ces soins soient couverts par le régime public. L’appui à un élargissement de la couverture des soins est lié à l’intérêt personnel et à des considérations idéologiques. Plus les gens perçoivent favorablement leur état de santé mentale, moins ils considèrent que les soins psychologiques devraient être priorisés. Les personnes ayant des opinions politiques plus à gauche tendent davantage à appuyer une extension de la couverture visant à inclure les services psychologiques. À l’inverse, plus une personne s’identifie à droite, moins elle est disposée à payer davantage pour un élargissement de la couverture universelle des soins.
Suggested Citation
Olivier Jacques & Marion Perrot & Alexandre Prud'homme & Carole Vincent & Roxane Borgès Da Silva, 2025.
"Accroitre la couverture universelle des soins de santé ? L’opinion des Québécois,"
CIRANO Project Reports
2025rp-23, CIRANO.
Handle:
RePEc:cir:cirpro:2025rp-23
Download full text from publisher
More about this item
Keywords
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
JEL classification:
- C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
- I13 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Insurance, Public and Private
- I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
- H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General
- H51 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Government Expenditures and Health
Statistics
Access and download statistics
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:cir:cirpro:2025rp-23. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ciranca.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.