| Title |
The Origins And DemiseOf The Public Option
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Affairs, June 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0363 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Helen A. Halpin, Peter Harbage |
| Abstract |
The "public option" for health insurance, as defined by the 111th Congress, grew from roots planted in California in 2001. Progressives supported it as a voluntary transition toward single-payer insurance, while conservatives opposed it as a government "takeover" of health care. Although present in several interim bills and in legislation passed in November 2009 by the House of Representatives, the public option was omitted from the legislation passed by the Senate in December 2009 and from the final package adopted by both houses in March 2010. Lack of support among moderate Democrats, opposition from Republicans, and ambiguous messages from the White House are among the explanations for the public option's defeat. However, there is nothing in the recently enacted legislation that would prohibit states from creating a public option in their exchanges. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 174 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 90 | 52% |
| Australia | 3 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Guinea | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 73 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 150 | 86% |
| Scientists | 9 | 5% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 8 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 7 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 69 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 25 | 36% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 12% |
| Researcher | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 9 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 30% |
| Social Sciences | 21 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 11 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1276. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 March 2024.
All research outputs
#10,732
of 25,761,363 outputs
Outputs from Health Affairs
#32
of 6,544 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17
of 105,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Affairs
#1
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,761,363 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,544 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 69.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 105,876 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.