Quantitative research demonstrates preferences for mental health insurance among Tehran residents, indicating a strong willingness to pay more for inpatient services and coverage levels.
Abstract Background: Understanding insurance preferences for mental health services can help provide appropriate service demand and insurance coverage for such services. Objectives: The present research aimed to investigate the preferences and willingness to pay of the people of Tehran for mental health insurance services using the discrete experiment method. Methods: Quantitative methods were used in this applied research and it was conducted on 420 individuals (210 patients with mental disorders and 210 healthy people) using a discrete choice experiment. The data analysis was performed using the conditional regression model as well. Results: The final model in this study included 6 attributes. The findings of the present research showed a statistically significant relationship (P <.001) between the odds ratios (OR) of choosing health insurance at all levels of insurance coverage except the service limit and the amount of insurance premium. Along with the increase in the cost coverage levels, the likelihood of choosing health insurance for the benefits of inpatient services at 70% and 90% levels (P <.001, OR=1.96 and P <.001, OR=2.28), outpatient services at 70% and 90% levels (P <.001, OR=1.53 and P <.001, OR=1.64), service delivery location (P <.001, OR=1.54), and the use of online services (P <.001, OR=0.84) increased significantly. Conclusions: The findings showed that the people of Tehran had the highest preference and willingness to pay for the coverage of inpatient services. The results of this study can be provided to health managers and policy makers to predict the welfare effects and people's reactions to changes in mental health insurance policies so that they would be able to plan better to provide higher-quality services with the participation of people.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Talebianpour et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: