What motivates individuals to share information with governments when adopting health technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic?

BACKGROUND: While digital governance has been adopted by governments around the world to assist in the management of the COVID-19 pandemic, the effectiveness of its implementation relies on the collection and use of personal information. This study examines the willingness of individuals to engage in information-sharing with governments when adopting health technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Data were obtained from a cross-sectional survey of 4,800 individuals drawn from 16 cities in China in 2021. Tobit regression models were used to assess the impacts of an array of determinants on an individual's willingness to share information with governments when adopting health technologies. RESULTS: Individuals who perceived a higher level of helpfulness, risk, expectations from others, weariness toward privacy issues, and were sensitive to positive outcomes were more willing to share information with governments when adopting health technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Across all the subgroups, self-efficacy only reduced the willingness to share information with governments for individuals who spent more than seven hours per day online. The negative impacts of being sensitive to negative outcomes on the willingness to share information were only found among females and the less educated group. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed the seemingly paradoxical behavior of individuals who perceived high risks of sharing information and a sense of fatigue toward privacy issues yet continued to be willing to share their information with their governments when adopting health technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic. This work highlighted significant differential motivations for sharing information with governments when using health technologies during a pandemic. Tailored policies that resonate with population sub-groups were suggested to be proposed to facilitate crisis management in future situations.

The feasibility analysis of integrating community-based health insurance schemes into the national health insurance scheme in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Uganda has a draft National Health Insurance Bill for the establishment of a National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS). The proposed health insurance scheme is to pool resources, where the rich will subsidize the treatment of the poor, the healthy will subsidize the treatment of the sick, and the young will subsidize the treatment of the elderly. However, there is still a lack of evidence on how the existing community-based health insurance schemes (CBHIS) can fit within the proposed national scheme. Thus, this study aimed at determining the feasibility of integrating the existing community-based health financing schemes into the proposed National Health Insurance Scheme. METHODS: In this study, we utilized a multiple-case study design involving mixed methods. The cases (i.e., units of analysis) were defined as the operations, functionality, and sustainability of the three typologies of community-based insurance schemes: provider-managed, community-managed, and third party-managed. The study combined various data collection methods, including interviews, survey desk review of documents, observation, and archives. FINDINGS: The CBHIS in Uganda are fragmented with limited coverage. Only 28 schemes existed, which covered a total of 155,057 beneficiaries with an average of 5,538 per scheme. The CBHIS existed in 33 out of 146 districts in Uganda. The average contribution per capita was estimated at Uganda Shillings (UGX) 75,215 = equivalent to United States Dollar (USD) 20.3, accounting for 37% of the national total health expenditure per capita UGX 51.00 = at 2016 prices. Membership was open to everyone irrespective of socio-demographic status. The schemes had inadequate capacity for management, strategic planning, and finances and lacked reserves and reinsurance. The CBHIS structures included promoters, the scheme core, and the community grass-root structures. CONCLUSION: The results demonstrate the possibility and provide a pathway to integrating CBHIS into the proposed NHIS. We however recommend implementation in a phased manner including first providing technical assistance to the existing CBHIS at the district level to address the critical capacity gaps. This would be followed by integrating all three elements of CBHIS structures. The last phase would then involve establishing a single fund for both the formal and informal sectors managed at the national level.