Effect of 'lifestyle stigma' on public support for NHS-provisioned pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and preventative interventions for HPV and type 2 diabetes: a nationwide UK survey.
Clicks: 350
ID: 14038
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
81.7
/100
350 views
289 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #122 of 442 articles by views in BMJ open
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 442 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
This study examines how the perceived role of poor lifestyle and irresponsible behaviour in contracting HIV, human papilloma virus (HPV) and diabetes affects public support for government-provisioned prevention efforts in Britain. It assesses whether public attitudes on healthcare spending are broadly sensitive to 'lifestyle stigmas'.We conducted an online survey of 738 respondents in Britain and embedded three separate survey experiments to measure support for government-provisioned interventions for HIV, HPV and type 2 diabetes. In each experiment, we manipulated language used to describe the extent to which the diseases are caused by lifestyle choices. Most respondents participated in all three experiments, but assignment was randomised within each condition. Analysis compared support among respondents exposed to 'lifestyle' treatment (information emphasising the disease's lifestyle causes) versus control treatment. We estimated three separate t-tests in which support for government provision of interventions is the dependent variable.Support for government-provisioned prevention was high for all three diseases. There was no statistical difference between treatment and control conditions for HIV (treatment mean=3.73, control mean=3.86, p=0.38). But in both HPV (treatment mean=3.96, control mean=4.43, p<0.01) and type 2 diabetes (treatment mean=3.53, control mean=4.03, p<0.01) experiments, support for government-provisioned interventions was significantly lower under lifestyle treatment conditions.Public opinion on healthcare expenditures in Britain is unexpected and uneven. Consistent participant support for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) shows public attitudes are not always sensitive to lifestyle stigmas-but for other diseases, perceived relationships between individual behaviour and poor health can still shape public opinion about health expenditures. Policymakers and practitioners should remain attentive to how health problems are framed and discussed to ensure broad public support, and take advantage of policy windows like with PrEP as they may close.
| Reference Key |
hildebrandt2019effectbmj
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Hildebrandt, Timothy;Bode, Leticia;Ng, Jessica S C; |
| Journal | BMJ open |
| Year | 2019 |
| DOI |
10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029747
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.