Data from: What is a disease? Perspectives of the public, health professionals, and legislators

Objective: To assess the perception of diseases and the willingness to use
public tax revenue for their treatment among relevant stakeholders.
Design: A population-based, cross-sectional mailed survey. Setting:
Finland Participants: 3 000 laypeople, 1 500 doctors, 1 500 nurses
(randomly identified from the databases of the Finnish Population
Register, the Finnish Medical Association and the Finnish Nurses
Association), and all 200 parliament members. Main outcome measures:
Respondents’ perspectives on a 5-point Likert scale on two claims on 60
states of being: “[This state of being] is a disease”; and ”[This state of
being] should be treated with public tax revenue”. Results: Of the 6 200
individuals approached, 3 280 (53%) responded. Of the 60 states of being,
≥80% of respondents considered 12 to be diseases (Likert scale responses
of “4” and “5”) and five not to be diseases (Likert scale responses of “1”
and “2”). There was considerable variability in most states, and great
variability in ten (≥20% of respondents of all groups considered it a
disease and ≥20% rejected as a disease). Doctors were more inclined to
consider states of being as diseases than laypeople; nurses and parliament
members were intermediate (p<0.001), but all groups showed large
variability. Responses to the two claims were very strongly correlated (r
= 0.96 [95% CI: 0.94-0.98]; p<0.001). Conclusions: There is large
disagreement among the public, health professionals, and legislators
regarding the classification of states of being as diseases and whether
their management should be publicly funded. Understanding attitudinal
differences can help to enlighten social discourse on a number of
contentious public policy issues.