Conceptualizations of “public health” and government action among U.S. adults in 2025

Clicks: 1
ID: 318973
2026
Free PDF
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.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #77 of 91 articles by views in Health Affairs Scholar

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create 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
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Understanding how Americans think about public health and the role of government institutions is crucial for informing effective health communication in a polarized political climate. Methods We deployed an open-ended national survey of 1,004 adults in October 2025 to assess public perceptions of these topics. Results Respondents associated the term “public health” with health for everyone (44%) and health of everyone (23%), alongside healthcare (20%) and other themes. The most common perceived government benefit was facilitating access to healthcare (39%)—particularly by addressing cost (16%). Among perceived government harms, more Republicans than Democrats cited overregulation (16% vs. 8%, p<0.01), limiting personal freedoms (16% vs. 6%, p<0.001), and inefficiency (10% vs. 4%, p<0.01); more Democrats than Republicans mentioned dismissing science (7% vs. 2%, p<0.01) and defunding (7% vs. 2%, p=0.02). Weighted analyses yielded minimal substantive differences from unweighted findings. Conclusion Findings reveal both cross-partisan common ground in term associations and divergent concerns regarding government action. Public health messaging should leverage shared priorities and acknowledge partisan concerns about government roles.
Reference Key
openalex_W7166324774 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Lauren Yan, Emily Cramer, Peter J. Winch, Emily A. Hurley
Journal Health Affairs Scholar
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/haschl/qxag166
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/haschl/qxag166
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.