ArticleThe International journal of health planning and management2025
How Private Health Insurance Shapes Perceptions of Public Healthcare in Sweden.
Article in The International journal of health planning and management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Perceptions of public and private health services in Poland: findings from a 2025 nationwide survey.BMC health services research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The increasing prevalence of private health insurance (PHI) in tax-funded healthcare systems challenges the principles of equity and universalism. A significant proportion of PHI holders in such systems receive their insurance as an employment benefit, granting them access to privately funded healthcare alongside the publicly funded system. This dual access raises critical questions about how individuals navigate between the two sectors and how their experiences shape their perceptions of public healthcare. The aim of this study is to explore how the use of PHI-funded healthcare services influences perceptions of and satisfaction with the public healthcare system. Specifically, we examine when PHI holders choose privately funded care over public services, how they perceive the two sectors, and whether they would purchase PHI independently if it were not offered as an employment benefit. An interview study was conducted in 2022 with 19 individuals in Sweden who receive PHI as an employment benefit. Using thematic analysis, the findings reveal a preference for privately funded services due to faster access and higher service quality. However, the medical quality of specialised care in the public sector is still regarded as high. PHI is perceived as providing a sense of security through prompt care, but few respondents expressed a willingness to purchase it privately, suggesting it is seen more as a convenience than a necessity. These findings highlight the role of PHI in shaping expectations and satisfaction within tax-funded healthcare systems, offering insights into its potential impact on public trust and support of universal healthcare.
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.