The Experts below are selected from a list of 121608 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Bernard Van Den Berg - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Individual Responsibility and health risk behaviour a contingent valuation study from the ex ante societal perspective
Health Policy, 2011Co-Authors: Sanne M Van Der Star, Bernard Van Den BergAbstract:This study analyzes peoples' social preferences for Individual Responsibility to health-risk behaviour in health care using the contingent valuation method adopting a societal perspective. We measure peoples' willingness to pay for inclusion of a treatment in basic health insurance of a hypothetical lifestyle dependent (smoking) and lifestyle independent (chronic) health problem. Our hypothesis is that peoples' willingness to pay for the independent and the dependent health problems are similar. As a methodological challenge, this study also analyzes the extent to which people consider their personal situation when answering contingent valuation questions adopting a societal perspective. 513 Dutch inhabitants responded to the questionnaire. They were asked to state their maximum willingness to pay for inclusion of treatments in basic health insurance package for two health problems. We asked them to assume that one hypothetical health problem was totally independent of behaviour (for simplicity called chronic disease). Alternatively, we asked them to assume that the other hypothetical health problem was totally caused by health-risk behaviour (for simplicity called smoking disease). We applied the payment card method to guide respondents to answer the contingent valuation method questions. Mean willingness to pay was 42.39 Euros (CI = 37.24-47.55) for inclusion of treatment for health problem that was unrelated to behaviour, with '5-10' and '10-20 Euros' as most frequently stated answers. In contrast, mean willingness to pay for inclusion treatment for health-risk related problem was 11.29 Euros (CI = 8.83-14.55), with '0' and '0-5 Euros' as most frequently provided answers. Difference in mean willingness to pay was substantial (over 30 Euros) and statistically significant (p-value = 0.000). Smokers were statistically significantly more (p-valueÂ
-
Individual Responsibility and health risk behaviour a contingent valuation study from the ex ante societal perspective
Health Policy, 2011Co-Authors: Sanne M Van Der Star, Bernard Van Den BergAbstract:This study analyzes peoples' social preferences for Individual Responsibility to health-risk behaviour in health care using the contingent valuation method adopting a societal perspective. We measure peoples' willingness to pay for inclusion of a treatment in basic health insurance of a hypothetical lifestyle dependent (smoking) and lifestyle independent (chronic) health problem. Our hypothesis is that peoples' willingness to pay for the independent and the dependent health problems are similar. As a methodological challenge, this study also analyzes the extent to which people consider their personal situation when answering contingent valuation questions adopting a societal perspective. 513 Dutch inhabitants responded to the questionnaire. They were asked to state their maximum willingness to pay for inclusion of treatments in basic health insurance package for two health problems. We asked them to assume that one hypothetical health problem was totally independent of behaviour (for simplicity called chronic disease). Alternatively, we asked them to assume that the other hypothetical health problem was totally caused by health-risk behaviour (for simplicity called smoking disease). We applied the payment card method to guide respondents to answer the contingent valuation method questions. Mean willingness to pay was 42.39 Euros (CI=37.24-47.55) for inclusion of treatment for health problem that was unrelated to behaviour, with '5-10' and '10-20 Euros' as most frequently stated answers. In contrast, mean willingness to pay for inclusion treatment for health-risk related problem was 11.29 Euros (CI=8.83-14.55), with '0' and '0-5 Euros' as most frequently provided answers. Difference in mean willingness to pay was substantial (over 30 Euros) and statistically significant (p-value=0.000). Smokers were statistically significantly more (p-value<0.01) willing to pay for the health-risk related (smoking) problem compared with non-smokers, while people with chronic condition were not willing to pay more for the health-risk unrelated (chronic) problem than people without chronic condition. This suggests that sub groups of people might differ in terms of abstracting from their personal situation when answering valuation questions from a societal perspective.
Sanne M Van Der Star - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Individual Responsibility and health risk behaviour a contingent valuation study from the ex ante societal perspective
Health Policy, 2011Co-Authors: Sanne M Van Der Star, Bernard Van Den BergAbstract:This study analyzes peoples' social preferences for Individual Responsibility to health-risk behaviour in health care using the contingent valuation method adopting a societal perspective. We measure peoples' willingness to pay for inclusion of a treatment in basic health insurance of a hypothetical lifestyle dependent (smoking) and lifestyle independent (chronic) health problem. Our hypothesis is that peoples' willingness to pay for the independent and the dependent health problems are similar. As a methodological challenge, this study also analyzes the extent to which people consider their personal situation when answering contingent valuation questions adopting a societal perspective. 513 Dutch inhabitants responded to the questionnaire. They were asked to state their maximum willingness to pay for inclusion of treatments in basic health insurance package for two health problems. We asked them to assume that one hypothetical health problem was totally independent of behaviour (for simplicity called chronic disease). Alternatively, we asked them to assume that the other hypothetical health problem was totally caused by health-risk behaviour (for simplicity called smoking disease). We applied the payment card method to guide respondents to answer the contingent valuation method questions. Mean willingness to pay was 42.39 Euros (CI = 37.24-47.55) for inclusion of treatment for health problem that was unrelated to behaviour, with '5-10' and '10-20 Euros' as most frequently stated answers. In contrast, mean willingness to pay for inclusion treatment for health-risk related problem was 11.29 Euros (CI = 8.83-14.55), with '0' and '0-5 Euros' as most frequently provided answers. Difference in mean willingness to pay was substantial (over 30 Euros) and statistically significant (p-value = 0.000). Smokers were statistically significantly more (p-valueÂ
-
Individual Responsibility and health risk behaviour a contingent valuation study from the ex ante societal perspective
Health Policy, 2011Co-Authors: Sanne M Van Der Star, Bernard Van Den BergAbstract:This study analyzes peoples' social preferences for Individual Responsibility to health-risk behaviour in health care using the contingent valuation method adopting a societal perspective. We measure peoples' willingness to pay for inclusion of a treatment in basic health insurance of a hypothetical lifestyle dependent (smoking) and lifestyle independent (chronic) health problem. Our hypothesis is that peoples' willingness to pay for the independent and the dependent health problems are similar. As a methodological challenge, this study also analyzes the extent to which people consider their personal situation when answering contingent valuation questions adopting a societal perspective. 513 Dutch inhabitants responded to the questionnaire. They were asked to state their maximum willingness to pay for inclusion of treatments in basic health insurance package for two health problems. We asked them to assume that one hypothetical health problem was totally independent of behaviour (for simplicity called chronic disease). Alternatively, we asked them to assume that the other hypothetical health problem was totally caused by health-risk behaviour (for simplicity called smoking disease). We applied the payment card method to guide respondents to answer the contingent valuation method questions. Mean willingness to pay was 42.39 Euros (CI=37.24-47.55) for inclusion of treatment for health problem that was unrelated to behaviour, with '5-10' and '10-20 Euros' as most frequently stated answers. In contrast, mean willingness to pay for inclusion treatment for health-risk related problem was 11.29 Euros (CI=8.83-14.55), with '0' and '0-5 Euros' as most frequently provided answers. Difference in mean willingness to pay was substantial (over 30 Euros) and statistically significant (p-value=0.000). Smokers were statistically significantly more (p-value<0.01) willing to pay for the health-risk related (smoking) problem compared with non-smokers, while people with chronic condition were not willing to pay more for the health-risk unrelated (chronic) problem than people without chronic condition. This suggests that sub groups of people might differ in terms of abstracting from their personal situation when answering valuation questions from a societal perspective.
Robert Henry Cox - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the consequences of welfare reform how conceptions of social rights are changing
Journal of Social Policy, 1998Co-Authors: Robert Henry CoxAbstract:The idea of the welfare state is commonly grounded in the principles of social rights, universality and solidarity. Over the past twenty years, welfare reforms have challenged the salience of this conceptualisation. This article argues that changes such as austerity measures, pension reform, administrative decentralisation and efforts to revive the obligation of citizenship have fostered a more discursive conception of social rights. When rights are discursive, the relative power of various clientele interests plays a greater role in the distribution of benefits than objective conditions of need. Also, such notions as universality and solidarity are giving way to selectivity and Individual Responsibility as the paramount principles of the welfare state.
Tove E Godskesen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
public awareness and Individual Responsibility needed for judicious use of antibiotics a qualitative study of public beliefs and perceptions
BMC Public Health, 2018Co-Authors: Mirko Ancillotti, Stefan Eriksson, Jorien Veldwijk, Jessica Nihlen Fahlquist, Dan I Andersson, Tove E GodskesenAbstract:High consumption of antibiotics has been identified as an important driver for the increasing antibiotic resistance, considered to be one of the greatest threats to public health globally. Simply informing the public about this consequence is insufficient to induce behavioral change. This study explored beliefs and perceptions among Swedes, with the aim of identifying factors promoting and hindering a judicious approach to antibiotics use. The study focused primarily on the medical use of antibiotics, also considering other aspects connected with antibiotic resistance, such as travelling and food consumption. Data were collected through focus group discussions at the end of 2016. Twenty-three Swedes were recruited using an area-based approach and purposive sampling, aiming for as heterogeneous groups as possible regarding gender (13 women, 10 men), age (range 20–81, mean 38), and education level. Interview transcripts were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The Health Belief Model was used as a theoretical framework. Antibiotic resistance was identified by participants as a health threat with the potential for terrible consequences. The severity of the problem was perceived more strongly than the actual likelihood of being affected by it. Metaphors such as climate change were abundantly employed to describe antibiotic resistance as a slowly emerging problem. There was a tension between Individual (egoistic) and collective (altruistic) reasons for engaging in judicious behavior. The Individual effort needed and antibiotics overprescribing were considered major barriers to such behavior. In their discussions, participants stressed the need for empowerment, achieved through good health communication from authorities and family physicians. Knowledge about antibiotic consumption and resistance, as well as values such as altruism and trust in the health care system, has significant influence on both perceptions of Individual Responsibility and on behavior. This suggests that these factors should be emphasized in health education and health promotion. To instead frame antibiotic resistance as a slowly emerging disaster, risks diminish the public perception of being susceptible to it.
Jorien Veldwijk - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
public awareness and Individual Responsibility needed for judicious use of antibiotics a qualitative study of public beliefs and perceptions
BMC Public Health, 2018Co-Authors: Mirko Ancillotti, Stefan Eriksson, Jorien Veldwijk, Jessica Nihlen Fahlquist, Dan I Andersson, Tove E GodskesenAbstract:High consumption of antibiotics has been identified as an important driver for the increasing antibiotic resistance, considered to be one of the greatest threats to public health globally. Simply informing the public about this consequence is insufficient to induce behavioral change. This study explored beliefs and perceptions among Swedes, with the aim of identifying factors promoting and hindering a judicious approach to antibiotics use. The study focused primarily on the medical use of antibiotics, also considering other aspects connected with antibiotic resistance, such as travelling and food consumption. Data were collected through focus group discussions at the end of 2016. Twenty-three Swedes were recruited using an area-based approach and purposive sampling, aiming for as heterogeneous groups as possible regarding gender (13 women, 10 men), age (range 20–81, mean 38), and education level. Interview transcripts were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The Health Belief Model was used as a theoretical framework. Antibiotic resistance was identified by participants as a health threat with the potential for terrible consequences. The severity of the problem was perceived more strongly than the actual likelihood of being affected by it. Metaphors such as climate change were abundantly employed to describe antibiotic resistance as a slowly emerging problem. There was a tension between Individual (egoistic) and collective (altruistic) reasons for engaging in judicious behavior. The Individual effort needed and antibiotics overprescribing were considered major barriers to such behavior. In their discussions, participants stressed the need for empowerment, achieved through good health communication from authorities and family physicians. Knowledge about antibiotic consumption and resistance, as well as values such as altruism and trust in the health care system, has significant influence on both perceptions of Individual Responsibility and on behavior. This suggests that these factors should be emphasized in health education and health promotion. To instead frame antibiotic resistance as a slowly emerging disaster, risks diminish the public perception of being susceptible to it.