Assessing Public Demand for Mental Health Insurance: The Role of Self-Interest and Ideology
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Despite the spike in mental health disorders since the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, most OECD countries are still lacking a comprehensive public coverage of mental health care. This situation is puzzling considering that a public insurance is not particularly fiscally costly. Indeed, cost-benefit analyses have shown that a public insurance would increase access to treatments, which would, in turn, generate economic gains by improving the productivity of the population. In this article, we study if a lack of public demand represents one of the reasons why we are not seeing a proliferation of public mental health insurance programs. Mental health researchers have spent very little time thinking about political economy, while political economists do not study mental health policies. Most mental health researchers assume that stigma (culture) is the cause of weak mental health provision. The few studies on the issue have shown that stigma against mental health disorders is associated with weaker support for public spending on mental health care. Yet mental health problem occurrence and stigma don’t vary so much and can’t explain cross country variation. Hence, mental health specialist cannot explain why supply varies between countries. Contributions: • We are applying a political science framework to study mental health policy preferences. • Most previous studies do not analyze the interplay of self-interest and ideology to explain individuals’ willingness to pay for the expansion of public coverage for mental health care. We highlight the role of ideological factors in explaining preference for public mental health care and by mapping the coalitions for and against the extension of public insurance. • There is also a lack of research assessing the influence of individuals' personal experience with mental health, whether they use treatments themselves, or whether they themselves are covered by private insurance and support for greater public insurance coverage. Moreover, there is a paucity of public opinion studies on the issue in Canada. • The Canadian context is pertinent because the public coverage health care is traditionally limited to care provided by doctors and hospitals and doesn’t include several non-medical health services, such as psychotherapy. In this article, we rely on an original survey conducted by the firm Léger with a representative sample of the Quebec population (N=1000), a province in which one major party proposed a public insurance for psychological services at the last provincial election in 2022.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,116 | 0,116 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».