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.
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 was done by the Consumer Choice Center, a right biased organization seeking to deregulate the Medical Industry.
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 SurgeryElective 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.
Thats actually wild, I figured the data was fucky but damn