CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 8Healthcare Systems and ReformsPublic Health Policies and EducationHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

Public preferences for government spending in Canada

Open access
Ramji, Sabrina, Quiñonez, Carlos·2012·International Journal for Equity in Health
DOI 10.1186/1475-9276-11-64PMC PMC3496632
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This study considers three questions: 1. What are the Canadian public’s prioritization preferences for new government spending on a range of public health-related goods outside the scope of the country’s national system of health insurance? 2. How homogenous or heterogeneous is the Canadian public in terms of these preferences? 3. What factors are predictive of the Canadian public’s preferences for new government spending? Data were collected in 2008 from a national random sample of Canadian adults through a telephone interview survey (n =1,005). Respondents were asked to rank five spending priorities in terms of their preference for new government spending. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted. As a first priority, Canadian adults prefer spending on child care (26.2%), followed by pharmacare (23.1%), dental care (20.8%), home care (17.2%), and vision care (12.7%). Sociodemographic characteristics predict spending preferences, based on the social position and needs of respondents. Policy leaders need to give fair consideration to public preferences in priority setting approaches in order to ensure that public health-related goods are distributed in a manner that best suits population needs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1475-9276-11-64

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Pay-for-performance systems have shown some potential to improve quality and outcomes of care.

    “Payment and remuneration concepts favouring health outcomes, such as Pay-for-Performance systems, have shown some potential to improve quality and outcomes of care.[84][85][86]”

    From Ending the neglect of global oral health: time for radical action. (2019) · cites this paper as [86]

    The Introduction discusses public funding and priority setting, while the Discussion addresses Canadians’ spending preferences; neither reports effects of pay-for-performance on care quality or outcomes. Searches for pay-for-performance and for payment incentives improving care found no relevant passage in our copy. Page numbers were not available. (LLM, conf=0.74)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Saunders R Does a Rising Tide Lift All Boats? Low-paid Workers in Canada. Vulnerable Workers Series No. 4 2005 Canadian Policy Research Networks, Ottawa, ON
  2. Quiñonez C Ieraci L Guttmann A Costs to the health care system of potentially preventable dental problems: findings from Ontario, Canada J Health Care Poor Underserved 2011 22 1048 58 21841295
  3. Vail S Canadians’ Values and Attitudes on Canada’s Health Care System 2002 The Conference Board of Canada, Ottawa, ON

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Ramji, S., & Quiñonez, C.
Affiliations
University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Quiñonez, Carlos
ORCID
Quiñonez, Carlos
Venue
International Journal for Equity in Health
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2012-10-30
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
64-64
ISSN
1475-9276 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/1475-9276-11-64
PMC
PMC3496632
OpenAlex
W2171934794
Cited by
8
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • International Journal for Equity in Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • TSpace (University of Toronto) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Government of Ontario
  • Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Healthcare Systems and Reforms
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
public preferences, government spending priorities, public health expenditure, health care financing, child care, pharmacare, dental care, home care, eye care, socio-demographic heterogeneity, priority setting, Canada
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Canada, Child, Child Care, Data Collection, Dental Care, Financing, Government, Humans, Insurance, Health, Male, Middle Aged, National Health Programs, Public Opinion, Socioeconomic Factors, Logistic Models, Drug Costs, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review