ArticleMedicine2019
Public needs for information disclosure on healthcare performance: Different determinants between Japan and the Netherlands.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Determinants of Nutrition Facts Table Use by Chinese Consumers for Nutritional Value Comparisons.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Public needs for information disclosure on healthcare performance: Different determinants between Japan and the Netherlands: Erratum.Medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The accumulated healthcare performance data related to unwarranted practice variations are not necessarily disseminated to patients and citizens. To clarify the needs for public disclosure, we explored Japanese and Dutch citizens' preferences and values towards information disclosure and healthcare disparity.Online opt-in survey was conducted and we asked citizens their preference to know about the healthcare performance indicators of regions and hospitals, and their attitudes towards healthcare equity. After a descriptive statistical analysis, Chi-squared automatic interaction detection tree analysis was performed to explore the socio-demographic determinants which were associated with positive value for information disclosure and healthcare equity. Then, we compared the combination of attributes of the highest and the lowest subgroups of each country and compared within and between countries. Last, logistic regression analysis was performed to further evaluate the impact of each determinant.Significant differences were observed between the 2 countries (Japan [JPN] 1038; Netherlands [NL] 1040). The crucial attributes identified were age, sex, educational background, and living area (JPN), along with age and sex (NL). Japanese comprised multiple subgroups with heterogeneous values, showed relatively low interest in knowing the information, and seemed to accept healthcare inequality, especially among urban males aged 20 to 59 years. Contrarily, Dutch people mostly showed high interest in both items. Female and older respondents valued information disclosure highly across countries.To share healthcare performance knowledge and empowering the public, historical, cultural, and socio-demographic context including health literacy of citizens' subgroups should be considered in making comprehensive public reports.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.