Do healthcare professionals have different views about healthcare rationing than college students? A mixed methods study in Portugal
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/11328/1853 |
Resumo: | The main aim of this paper is to investigate the views of healthcare professionals in Portugal about healthcare rationing, and compare them with the views of college students. A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from a sample of 60 healthcare professionals and 180 college students. Respondents faced a hypothetical rationing dilemma where they had to order four patients (differentiated by personal characteristics and health conditions) and justify their choices. Multinomial logistic regressions were used to test for differences in orderings, and content analysis to categorize the written justifications. The findings suggest that both groups appeared to support three main rationing principles: (i) health maximization, (ii) priority to the severely ill and (iii) priority to the young. However, professionals seemed to give less weight to the latter principle. In conclusion, professionals have similar views to students about healthcare rationing, though may be slightly less inclined to give priority to the young. |
id |
RCAP_6c11e6f0dcf648634ccfcf090bb1d3de |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.uportu.pt:11328/1853 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Do healthcare professionals have different views about healthcare rationing than college students? A mixed methods study in PortugalThe main aim of this paper is to investigate the views of healthcare professionals in Portugal about healthcare rationing, and compare them with the views of college students. A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from a sample of 60 healthcare professionals and 180 college students. Respondents faced a hypothetical rationing dilemma where they had to order four patients (differentiated by personal characteristics and health conditions) and justify their choices. Multinomial logistic regressions were used to test for differences in orderings, and content analysis to categorize the written justifications. The findings suggest that both groups appeared to support three main rationing principles: (i) health maximization, (ii) priority to the severely ill and (iii) priority to the young. However, professionals seemed to give less weight to the latter principle. In conclusion, professionals have similar views to students about healthcare rationing, though may be slightly less inclined to give priority to the young.Oxford Academic2017-05-31T10:56:06Z2017-05-01T00:00:00Z2017-05info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11328/1853eng10.1093/phe/phx005Pinho, MicaelaBorges, Ana PintoCookson, Richardinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-06-15T02:10:08ZPortal AgregadorONG |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Do healthcare professionals have different views about healthcare rationing than college students? A mixed methods study in Portugal |
title |
Do healthcare professionals have different views about healthcare rationing than college students? A mixed methods study in Portugal |
spellingShingle |
Do healthcare professionals have different views about healthcare rationing than college students? A mixed methods study in Portugal Pinho, Micaela |
title_short |
Do healthcare professionals have different views about healthcare rationing than college students? A mixed methods study in Portugal |
title_full |
Do healthcare professionals have different views about healthcare rationing than college students? A mixed methods study in Portugal |
title_fullStr |
Do healthcare professionals have different views about healthcare rationing than college students? A mixed methods study in Portugal |
title_full_unstemmed |
Do healthcare professionals have different views about healthcare rationing than college students? A mixed methods study in Portugal |
title_sort |
Do healthcare professionals have different views about healthcare rationing than college students? A mixed methods study in Portugal |
author |
Pinho, Micaela |
author_facet |
Pinho, Micaela Borges, Ana Pinto Cookson, Richard |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Borges, Ana Pinto Cookson, Richard |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Pinho, Micaela Borges, Ana Pinto Cookson, Richard |
description |
The main aim of this paper is to investigate the views of healthcare professionals in Portugal about healthcare rationing, and compare them with the views of college students. A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from a sample of 60 healthcare professionals and 180 college students. Respondents faced a hypothetical rationing dilemma where they had to order four patients (differentiated by personal characteristics and health conditions) and justify their choices. Multinomial logistic regressions were used to test for differences in orderings, and content analysis to categorize the written justifications. The findings suggest that both groups appeared to support three main rationing principles: (i) health maximization, (ii) priority to the severely ill and (iii) priority to the young. However, professionals seemed to give less weight to the latter principle. In conclusion, professionals have similar views to students about healthcare rationing, though may be slightly less inclined to give priority to the young. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-05-31T10:56:06Z 2017-05-01T00:00:00Z 2017-05 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/11328/1853 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11328/1853 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1093/phe/phx005 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Oxford Academic |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Oxford Academic |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
|
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1777302551247454209 |