Resumo Objetivo: Este trabalho avalia a diferença de género nos tempos de espera para cirurgias programadas, usando cerca de 2.6 milhões de observações sobre os episódios cirúrgicos que ocorreram nos hospitais do Serviço Nacional de Saúde Português entre 2011 e 2015. Metodologia: Estimamos o diferencial bruto entre géneros nos tempos de espera, e depois adicionamos variáveis de controlo que expliquem a diferença para estimar um diferencial ajustado. As variáveis são adicionadas de maneira a permitir uma especificação paramétrica mais flexível. Em seguida, usamos a decomposição de Gelbach para entender a contribuição de cada variável para a divergência entre os diferenciais de género bruto e ajustado. Resultados: O diferencial bruto de 10% entre géneros é reduzido para um diferencial ajustado de 3% depois de considerado o efeito das variáveis explicativas observadas. A decomposição e Gelbach mostra que a prioridade do paciente e os efeitos fixos hospitalares são as variáveis que mais contribuem para a componente explicada da diferença. A análise sugere que os homens tendem a ser classificados com prioridades mais severas e que existem especificidades hospitalares que fazem com que os homens tenham tempos de espera mais curtos. Conclusões: No geral, os nossos resultados identificam um viés de género contra as mulheres, mas a dimensão do viés é menor do que sugerido pela literatura anterior.

Abstract Objective: This paper evaluates the gender gap in waiting times for scheduled surgery, using information on 2.6 million surgical episodes in Portuguese National Health Service hospitals covering the period from 2011 to 2015. Methodology: We estimated the gross gender gap, i.e., the differential between the waiting times of men and women, and then add several explanatory variables that can account for this difference to estimate an adjusted gender gap. The variables are added in a way that permits the most flexible parametric specification. Next, we used Gelbach’s decomposition to understand the contribution of each variable to the difference between the gross and the adjusted gender gaps. Results: The gross gender gap of 10% is reduced to a 3% adjusted gender gap after accounting for observable explanatory factors. Gelbach’s decomposition shows that patient priority and hospital-fixed effects are the variables that contribute the most to the explained component of the gap. The analysis suggests that men tend to be ranked with more severe priorities, and that there are hospital specificities that cause men to have shorter waiting times. Conclusions: Overall, we identified a gender bias against women in surgery waiting times, but the size of the bias is smaller than was previously suggested in the literature.

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE: To investigate how sociodemographic conditions, political factors, organizational confidence, and non-pharmaceutical interventions compliance affect the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Brazil. METHODS: Data collection took place between November 25th, 2020 and January 11th, 2021 using a nationwide online survey. Subsequently, the researches performed a descriptive analysis on the main variables and used logistic regression models to investigate the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. RESULTS: Less concern over vaccine side effects could improve the willingness to be vaccinated (probability changed by 7.7 pp; p < 0.10). The current vaccine distrust espoused by the Brazilian president is associated with vaccine hesitancy, among his voter base. Lower performance perception (“Very Bad” with 10.7 pp; p < 0.01) or higher political opposition (left-oriented) regarding the current presidency is associated with the willingness to be vaccinated. Higher compliance with non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) is usually positively associated with the willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine (+1 score to NPI compliance index is associated with higher willingness to be vaccinated by 1.4 pp, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Willingness to be vaccinated is strongly associated with political leaning, perceived federal government performance, vaccine side effects, and compliance with non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs).

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE: To investigate how sociodemographic conditions, political factors, organizational confidence, and non-pharmaceutical interventions compliance affect the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Brazil. METHODS: Data collection took place between November 25th, 2020 and January 11th, 2021 using a nationwide online survey. Subsequently, the researches performed a descriptive analysis on the main variables and used logistic regression models to investigate the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. RESULTS: Less concern over vaccine side effects could improve the willingness to be vaccinated (probability changed by 7.7 pp; p < 0.10). The current vaccine distrust espoused by the Brazilian president is associated with vaccine hesitancy, among his voter base. Lower performance perception (“Very Bad” with 10.7 pp; p < 0.01) or higher political opposition (left-oriented) regarding the current presidency is associated with the willingness to be vaccinated. Higher compliance with non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) is usually positively associated with the willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine (+1 score to NPI compliance index is associated with higher willingness to be vaccinated by 1.4 pp, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Willingness to be vaccinated is strongly associated with political leaning, perceived federal government performance, vaccine side effects, and compliance with non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs).