Dataset Information

Public Attitudes Toward Priority Setting Principles in Health Care During COVID-19.

ABSTRACT: What role should cost-effectiveness play in health care priority setting? We assess the level of acceptance toward different priority setting principles in health care during COVID-19 and in general, thereby exploring public support for principles presented at different levels of abstraction. An online survey was distributed to a diverse sample of the Swedish population (n = 1 553). The results show that respondents were generally more supportive of priority setting principles when expressed in general abstract terms than when expressed in more case specific concrete terms. However, prioritization based on cost-effectiveness was deemed as more acceptable when expressed in concrete terms related to health maximization rather than as an abstract principle. Respondents had a general inclination in support of physicians and other health care professionals the primary responsibility for the allocation of scarce resources in the healthcare during COVID-19, while being less supportive of health economists and politicians being involved in these decisions.

SUBMITTER: Tinghog G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10012618 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Public Attitudes Toward Priority Setting Principles in Health Care During COVID-19.

Tinghög Gustav G Strand Liam L

Frontiers in health services 20220513

What role should cost-effectiveness play in health care priority setting? We assess the level of acceptance toward different priority setting principles in health care during COVID-19 and in general, thereby exploring public support for principles presented at different levels of abstraction. An online survey was distributed to a diverse sample of the Swedish population (<i>n</i> = 1 553). The results show that respondents were generally more supportive of priority setting principles when expres ...[more]

PMID: 36925871

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMost US adults have limited health literacy skills. They struggle to understand complex health information and services and to make informed health decisions. The Internet has quickly become one of the most popular places for people to search for information about their health, thereby making access to quality information on the Web a priority. However, there are no standardized criteria for evaluating Web-based health information. Every 10 years, the US Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (ODPHP) develops a set of measurable objectives for improving the health of the nation over the coming decade, known as Healthy People. There are two objectives in Healthy People 2020 related to website quality. The first is objective Health Communication and Health Information Technology (HC/HIT) 8.1: increase the proportion of health-related websites that meet 3 or more evaluation criteria for disclosing information that can be used to assess information reliability. The second is objective HC/HIT-8.2: increase the proportion of health-related websites that follow established usability principles.ObjectiveThe ODPHP conducted a nationwide assessment of the quality of Web-based health information using the Healthy People 2020 objectives. The ODPHP aimed to establish (1) a standardized approach to defining and measuring the quality of health websites; (2) benchmarks for measurement; (3) baseline data points to capture the current status of website quality; and (4) targets to drive improvement.MethodsThe ODPHP developed the National Quality Health Website Survey instrument to assess the quality of health-related websites. The ODPHP used this survey to review 100 top-ranked health-related websites in order to set baseline data points for these two objectives. The ODPHP then set targets to drive improvement by 2020.ResultsThis study reviewed 100 health-related websites. For objective HC/HIT-8.1, a total of 58 out of 100 (58.0%) websites met 3 or more out of 6 reliability criteria. For objective HC/HIT-8.2, a total of 42 out of 100 (42.0%) websites followed 10 or more out of 19 established usability principles. On the basis of these baseline data points, ODPHP set targets for the year 2020 that meet the minimal statistical significance-increasing objective HC/HIT-8.1 data point to 70.5% and objective HC/HIT-8.2 data point to 55.7%.ConclusionsThis research is a critical first step in evaluating the quality of Web-based health information. The criteria proposed by ODPHP provide methods to assess website quality for professionals designing, developing, and managing health-related websites. The criteria, baseline data, and targets are valuable tools for driving quality improvement.

Project description:BackgroundA global rollout of vaccinations is currently underway to mitigate and protect people from the COVID-19 pandemic. Several individuals have been using social media platforms such as Twitter as an outlet to express their feelings, concerns, and opinions about COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination programs. This study examined COVID-19 vaccine-related tweets from January 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021, to uncover the topics, themes, and variations in sentiments of public Twitter users.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to examine key themes and topics from COVID-19 vaccine-related English tweets posted by individuals, and to explore the trends and variations in public opinions and sentiments.MethodsWe gathered and assessed a corpus of 2.94 million COVID-19 vaccine-related tweets made by 1.2 million individuals. We used CoreX topic modeling to explore the themes and topics underlying the tweets, and used VADER sentiment analysis to compute sentiment scores and examine weekly trends. We also performed qualitative content analysis of the top three topics pertaining to COVID-19 vaccination.ResultsTopic modeling yielded 16 topics that were grouped into 6 broader themes underlying the COVID-19 vaccination tweets. The most tweeted topic about COVID-19 vaccination was related to vaccination policy, specifically whether vaccines needed to be mandated or optional (13.94%), followed by vaccine hesitancy (12.63%) and postvaccination symptoms and effects (10.44%) Average compound sentiment scores were negative throughout the 16 weeks for the topics postvaccination symptoms and side effects and hoax/conspiracy. However, consistent positive sentiment scores were observed for the topics vaccination disclosure, vaccine efficacy, clinical trials and approvals, affordability, regulation, distribution and shortage, travel, appointment and scheduling, vaccination sites, advocacy, opinion leaders and endorsement, and gratitude toward health care workers. Reversal in sentiment scores in a few weeks was observed for the topics vaccination eligibility and hesitancy.ConclusionsIdentification of dominant themes, topics, sentiments, and changing trends about COVID-19 vaccination can aid governments and health care agencies to frame appropriate vaccination programs, policies, and rollouts.

Dataset Information

Public Attitudes Toward Priority Setting Principles in Health Care During COVID-19.

Publications

Public Attitudes Toward Priority Setting Principles in Health Care During COVID-19.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets