ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025
How Stable Are Individual Preferences for Health Expenditure in Germany?
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThis study analyzed the stability of individual preferences for the allocation of expenditure in the healthcare system using an experimental setting. Understanding these preferences can support policy decisions aimed at achieving a more needs-based allocation of scarce resources in healthcare systems. Stability in preferences might be essential in order to avoid frequent legislative changes and can potentially enhance public satisfaction with the healthcare system.
methodsIndividual preferences were assessed through two questionnaire-based experimental studies conducted before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, each with about 160 participants, in the context of a healthcare seminar in the MaxLab of the Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, Germany. This study was intended as a preliminary study for a larger follow-up panel study. In particular, the questionnaire contained questions regarding satisfaction with the healthcare system, optimization options, possible maximum contributions, and preferences for the allocation of notional healthcare budget and research funds in order to provide initial evidence regarding the stability of such preferences. As the data were collected both before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, this significant change in the situation helps to provide clear indications of stability. The preferences collected were compared to the actual allocation of expenditure derived from official statistics in order to identify potential areas for policy adjustment.
resultsPreferences for the allocation of healthcare expenditure appear to be relatively stable despite the effects of the pandemic. However, noticeable discrepancies exist between individual preferences and actual healthcare spending. Satisfaction with the healthcare system also remains relatively stable at a high level.
conclusionsOverall, the scientific measurement of public preferences could support more informed political decision-making and contribute to sustained satisfaction with the healthcare system. In particular, the distribution of funds to different disease categories should be adjusted on the basis of such preferences, taking into account the respective medical indications after representative regular surveys have been carried out.
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.