I'm really disappointed in statista for publishing this. I've always considered them a solid source of data but this is flat out misinformation. It's based on study done by a biased source using questionable methodology using data from literature review that stretches at least as far back as the year 2000!
The study is called "Healthcare Time Saved Index" and you can access it on their website.. You can read the full study (PDF) by clicking the link on that site and you can access their data / sourcing (Google Docs) at the link they posted.
If you want to hop right to the data / sourcing you can use this link.
First off despite what the infographic says this is absolutely 100% NOT 2023 data! If you look at column I (Average wait times for a primary physician appointment (days)) and check the sourcing this is what you will find:
America - Sources give data from 2021 and 2022.
Australia - Source is using data from 2000 - 2019 with the GP Data specifically ending in 2014.
United Kingdom - Source is using poll data from April of 2022.
Sweden - Source is using data from 2020.
For GP visits every one of their sources is using data from the pandemic, none of them are using data from 2023 as claimed by the graphic.
It doesn't get any better for "Non Emergency Surgery".
First off the CRC Study doesn't say "Non Emergency Surgery", it says "Elective Surgery" and as Johns Hopkins explains they are not the same.
Jumping back to the data it somehow gets worse.
America - Their source (Fee) relies on another source (Frasier) who is using data from 2016! The Fee.org article is also bashing Canada's healthcare system. (bias)
Australia - Data from 2022.
United Kingdom - Data from 2018.
Sweden - Data from 2018. (Same source as the UK)
So for Non Emergency Surgery Elective Surgery visits the data is once again NOT from 2023, instead it's a mix of significantly older and pandemic era data that at least in one case relies on a biased source.
So as I said in another comment "The study is fucking trash and someone took that trash, piled it into a dumpster, and then set it on fire in order to produce the infographic."
The post should be taken down by the mods as misinformation and statista should delete the infographic with embarrassment.
I've actually done analyses with OECD data. It's terrible. This is about as good as it gets. Countries don't report these data points very reliably. You get some that are a decade old, some that are much newer.
The real bias is in the use of "non-emergency surgery" as a data point. Look at time to see a specialist and you'll get a much different picture. (edit: spoiler alert, the US sucks. ask me about healthcare scheduling if you want me to nerd out for a bit)
Hilarious if the data is true though, cause everywhere it's more regulated and everywhere it's better. So if anything the results show that the US has moved in the wrong direction. But then.. this is probably coming frkm the "more guns prevent gun violence" and "misinformation is countered with more speech" people.. so yeah.
Anyway.. thanks for pointing out the uselessness of this graph.
Looks like Consumer Choice Centre is a right wing anti regulation lobby group. Surprising that they would make an infographic that makes the US healthcare system look so terrible if their goal was to advocate for deregulation.
The point of the "Study" they did was about efficiency and time, specifically how increased use of TeleMed, Blister Packs, and generally available contraceptives would save Patients time and Providers money. Does that make more sense?
This "study" is low quality work, barely above junk status. It uses old and weird sources and very questionable methodology. It's possible they came to the right conclusion (which wasn't US bashing btw) but if they did its only because the target was so wide that they could hardly fail to miss.
I imagine the US times are exclusive of the "maybe it will heal on its own and I won't need to bankrupt myself" pre-doctor waiting period. I know I needed ankle surgery for several years before I gave up and went to the surgeon. I work with a guy who has needed knee replacement for as long as I have known him (and the injuries were not fresh when I met him).
The above waiting periods are not exclusive to non-emergency situations either. I know someone who almost died trying to tough out appendicitis (the appendectomy was more expensive and complicated than it would have been if he had gone immediately as a result).
I really don't think the above anecdotal evidence are particularly rare or unique either.
IDK what the wait time is about on the green bar. I typically have no trouble getting a same-day general practice doctor appointment with a phone call in the morning, in the USA. Has been this way for all my life and I was born last century.
Specialist appointments are where I have encountered delays of weeks.
A regular Dr. appointments in my area are out 2 months.
Specialist are at 6 months. Some of them are out as long as 18 months .
My wife is going in for non-emergency surgery today, it's taken 6 months.
It's gotten bad enough that you have to go the ER or Urgent care for stuff a GP traditionally to handles.
Look up Providence Group, they purchase the local hospital system and have since fucked it up. Providers are leaving in droves because of their naked corruption.
and its not like you just go to non emergency surgery. there is a generally a process of identifying the need with the primary care that requires multiple visits so if the primary care takes a long time it effectively makes the non emergency surgery take longer to actually get done. This is even the case in emergency cases where it takes the primary to identify you have something very very wrong with you.
I mean, in Australia it is, although you can usually get one the same day/next day. Not sure where the 4 days comes from. The 21 days from the US is just madness tho, if accurate. By the time you see the doctor whatever you had had either passed or has killed you.
That's a solid / highly regarded source but the data they used stretches as far back as 2000. Four days to see a GP may have been accurate in 2014 but could easily be out of date now.
The 21 days from the US is just madness tho, if accurate.
That 21 days number was a nationwide average from during the pandemic. I tracked down their source and while the infographic says "2023" the study source says 2021-2022...right during the pandemic. So not only is the year wrong the infographic is mislabled / misleading.
The study is fucking trash and someone took that trash, piled it into a dumpster, and then set it on fire in order to produce the infographic.
The "Study" that this infographic is based on is full of shit. The deeper I dig into the data the more disgusted I get with it. It uses old / weird sources for a number of countries (for instance that US wait time is from the pandemic), they change up terms (Non-Emergency and Elective are not the same thing) and a whole host of other problems.
Here in Scotland, yes. I usually opt for a phone appointment because I'm lazy. It's never urgent but I can still get one within a couple of days. And that's with the surgery having recently closed its list to new patients because of a population surge in the town (new housing).
This post contains misinformation, but I'm conflicted about removing it. Doing so would also eliminate the valuable conversation that follows. Keeping it up allows for critical discourse and sharing of more reputable sources on the subject. The community's commentary effectively highlights how the infographic greatly misrepresents global healthcare waits, and I fully support the community members' contributions to this discussion.
What fucking Wonder World are these times from? Are like rich people's home concierge services bringing the numbers down? I don't think I've seen a doctor in under an hour in like 10 years.