Skip to main content
. 2019 Apr 23;19:238. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4067-4

Table 1.

Characteristics of respondents who sought a second opinion in the public system vs. the private system (n = 339)

Characteristics Public system n = 125 (%) Private system n = 214 (%) p-value
Gender 0.892
 Male 50 (37.3%) 84 (62.7%)
 Female 75 (36.6%) 130 (63.4%)
Age group 0.29
 18–39 41 (42.3%) 56 (57.7%)
 40–59 38 (31.9%) 81 (68.1%)
 60+ 46 (37.4%) 77 (62.6%)
Educational level 0.296
 Basic 20 (47.6%) 22 (52.4%)
 High school 56 (36.4%) 98 (63.6%)
 Academic 49 (34.5%) 93 (65.5%)
 Missing values 1
Personal status 0.43
 Living with a partner 95 (35.4%) 173 (64.6%)
 Not Living with a partner 28 (40.6%) 41 (59.4%)
 Missing values 2
Ethnicity 0.237
 Jewish 98 (34.9%) 183 (65.1%)
 Arabic 23 (43.4%) 30 (56.6%)
 Missing values 4 1
Religiosity .015*
 Religious 51 (45.1%) 62 (54.9%)
 Secular 70 (31.7%) 151 (68.3%)
 Missing values 4 1
Self-reported income group .027*
 Well below the average 40 (48.2%) 43 (51.8%)
 Around the average 57 (31.5%) 124 (68.5%)
 Well above the average 8 (30.8%) 18 (69.2%)
 Missing values 20 29
Socioeconomic level (by residential area) .015*
 Low 33 (49.3%) 34 (50.7%)
 Middle and higha 86 (33.2%) 173 (66.8%)
 Missing values 6 7
Immigration .006*
 Native-born and established immigrants 106 (34.5%) 201 (65.5%)
 Immigrants (immigrated to Israel after 1989) 19 (59.4%) 13 (40.6%)
Country of birth 0.741
 Israeli 78 (36.1%) 138 (63.9%)
 European / American 14 (37.8%) 23 (62.2%)
 Soviet Union 13 (44.8%) 16 (55.2%)
 Asian / African 18 (32.7%) 37 (67.3%)
 Missing values 2
Perceived Health status 0.68
 Very good 49 (38.9%) 77 (61.1%)
 Good 44 (34.1%) 85 (65.9%)
 Not so good 27 (34.2%) 52 (65.8%)
Missing values 5

p < 0.05

Note: Percentages are calculated as valid % per each row (i.e., each row sums up to 100%, without Missing values)

aHigh socio-economic level was combined with middle socio-economic level because of small numbers at this level.