The public's preferences concerning the allocation of financial resources to health care: Results from a representative population survey in Germany

European Psychiatry

Volumn 19, Issue 8, 2004, Pages 478-482

  Matschinger, Herbert ^a   Angermeyer, Matthias C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Discrimination; Mental illness; Multiple unidimensional unfolding; Population survey

Indexed keywords

ADULT; DATA ANALYSIS; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; GERMANY; HEALTH CARE AVAILABILITY; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE FINANCING; HUMAN; MENTAL DISEASE; MENTAL HEALTH CARE; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC OPINION; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; REVIEW;

EID: 10044289539     PISSN: 09249338     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2004.05.002     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Angermeyer M.C. From intuition to evidence-based anti-stigma interventions. World Psychiatry. 1:2002;21-22
2. Angermeyer M.C., Matschinger H. Social distance towards the mentally ill: results of representative surveys in the Federal Republic of Germany. Psychol Med. 27:1997;131-141
3. Angermeyer M.C., Matschinger H. The stereotype of schizophrenia and its impact on the discrimination of people with schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull. 2004;. [in press]
4. Angermeyer M.C., Schulze B. Reinforcing stereotypes: the focus on forensic cases in news reporting and its influence on public attitudes towards the mentally ill. Int J Law Psychiatry. 24:2001;469-486
5. Coombs C.H. A theory of data. 1964;Wiley, New York, London, Sidney
6. Guttman L. The quantification of a class of attributes: a theory and method of scale construction. Horst P. The prediction of personal adjustment. 1941;319-348 Social Science Research Council, New York
7. Gutièrrez-Lobos K. Rechtliche Benachteiligung psychisch Kranker in Österreich [Legal discrimination of mentally disordered people in Austria]. Neuropsychiatrie. 16:2002;22-26
8. Hadorn D.C. Setting health care priorities in Oregon. Cost-effectiveness meets the rule of rescue. JAMA. 265:1991;2218-2225
9. Hayward P., Bright J.A. Stigma and mental illness: a review and critique. J Ment Health. 6:1997;345-354
10. Jonson A. Bentham in a box: technology assessment and health care allocation. Law Med Health Care. 14:1986;172-174
11. Kendell R.E. The next 25 years. Br J Psychiatry. 176:2000;6-9
12. Link B.G., Phelan J.C. Conceptualizing stigma. Ann Rev Sociol. 27:2001;363-385
13. Link B.G., Struening E.L., Neese-Todd S., Asmussen S., Phelan J.C. The consequences of stigma for the self-esteem of people with mental illnesses. Psychiatr Serv. 52:2001;1621-1626
14. Loevinger J. The technique of homogeneous tests compared with some aspects of scale analysis and factor analysis. Psychol Bull. 45:1948;507-530
15. Maag G. Zur Erfassung von Werten in der Umfrageforschung: Ein empirischer Beitrag zur Neukonzeptualisierung und Operationalisierung [The assessment of value orientations in survey research. An empirical contribution to its conceptualization and operationalization]. Z Soziol. 18:1989;313-323
16. Murray J.L., Lopez A.D. The global burden of disease. 1996;Harvard University Press, Cambridge
17. Post W.J. Nonparametric unfolding models. 1992;DSWO Press, Leiden
18. van Schuur W.H., Kiers A.H. Why factor analysis is often the incorrect model for analyzing bipolar concepts, and what model to use instead. Appl Psychol Meas. 18:1994;97-110
19. van Schuur W.H., Post W.J. MUDFOLD A program for MULTIPLE UNIDIMENSIONAL UNFOLDING Version 4.0. 1998;iec ProGAMMA, Groningen
20. Van Schuur W.H. Nonparametrical unidimensional unfolding for multicategory data. Polit Anal. 4:1993;41-74