ArticleHealth research policy and systems2025
Optimizing patient autonomy: a discrete choice experiment on preferences and disparities in healthcare provider selection.
Article in Health research policy and systems, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Preferences for rapid implementation science: a real-time discrete choice experiment.Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- Accountability, autonomy, equity, and trust in selected healthcare systems: a comparative analysis.Israel journal of health policy research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn 2023, Israel introduced a legislative reform that, according to the Israeli Ministry of Health, aims to improve transparency and expand options for healthcare providers. This reform seeks to enhance patient choice, improve service quality and accessibility, foster competition and strengthen the public health system. The goals also include empowering patients to fully exercise their rights and make more informed healthcare decisions.
objectivesThis study explores public preferences regarding hospital choice before the 2023 reform, evaluates the relative importance of key hospital attributes influencing decision-making, assuming a baseline of high-quality care and analyses how these preferences vary across demographic and socio-economic groups.
methodsUtilizing a discrete choice experiment involving 2117 participants, this study quantifies preferences for different hospital attributes, including hospital type, geographical location, and appointment availability. The study design incorporates attributes identified through a literature review and expert interviews, optimized to estimate trade-offs between attribute levels.
resultsFindings indicate a strong preference for shorter waiting times and proximity to specialized services. Significant disparities emerge among respondents, particularly between those with public versus additional voluntary insurance coverage and across population groups (i.e. Arabs and Jews). A notable proportion of Arab respondents preferred the existing hospital choice regime over any suggested attribute combinations.
conclusionsWhile legislative reforms are designed to enhance patient involvement in decision-making, substantial gaps remain between policy intentions and actual public preferences. Although increased autonomy and choice empower patients, they can also introduce challenges, such as decision fatigue and the consumer paradox, potentially undermining reform effectiveness. Our findings underscore the need for more nuanced, patient-centred health policy approaches. Future research should focus on strategies that better address the diverse needs and preferences of the population, ultimately enhancing healthcare system efficiency and equity.
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.