Engaging the Canadian public on reimbursement decision-making for drugs for rare diseases: a national online survey

Table 4 Association between priority selection and agreement with each funding scenario

Funding Scenario^a	Priority	OR	95% CI
Pay for Drugs^b	Longer Life	1.52	1.20–1.93
Pay for Drugs^b	Cost Containment^b	0.71	0.58–0.88
Prioritize Other Programs	Effective Healthcare	1.42	1.17–1.82
	Cost Containment	1.67	1.34–2.06
	Lack of Treatment	0.78	0.61–1.00
Fund Drug if Justified	Effective Healthcare	1.55	1.21–1.98
Canada-wide Equality	Longer Life	1.57	1.14–2.20
	Cost Containment	0.50	0.38–0.65
	National Access	4.14	3.07–5.65
	Severity of Symptoms	0.70	0.53–0.93

^aReference category = Do not agree
^bInterpretation example: Respondents who ranked cost containment as one their top priorities were 29% less likely (OR 0.71) to agree that provincial payers should pay for DRDs if there is any improvement in health, without considering the potential uses of these funds. Odds ratios represent the odds of agreeing or strongly agreeing with the scenario if that priority was selected as a top priority versus if it was not
Agree: 4 = agree and 5 = completely agree; CI: confidence interval; Do not agree: 1 = completely disagree, 2 = disagree, and 3 = neither agree nor disagree; OR = odds ratio

ISSN: 1472-6963