Psychological distress and trust in healthcare: individual perceptions and national contexts - a multilevel analysis

Abstract Aim This study examines the association between trust in doctors, income-based perceived fairness, income-based access inequality in healthcare, and self-reported psychological distress, considering individual perceptions and country level socioeconomic context. Methods ISSP 2021 Health and Health Care data were analyzed ( N = 26 023; 21 countries). A multilevel logistic regression model was estimated. Country level indicators included income inequality (Gini coefficient), Human development index (HDI) and average confidence in the healthcare system. Results Compared with neutral trust, trusting doctors was associated with lower odds of distress (OR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.72–0.84), while distrust was associated with higher odds (OR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.01–1.30). Strong perceptions of healthcare injustice were associated with elevated distress, reflected in higher odds among those rating the system as very unfair (OR = 1.26 95% CI 1.16–1.37) and those perceiving access as harder for the poor (OR = 1.30 95% CI 1.20–1.41). At the country level, higher income inequality (OR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.10–1.44) was associated with higher distress, whereas HDI and average confidence in the healthcare system was not significantly related to distress. Discussion Overall, the findings highlight that psychological distress is closely linked to both individual-level institutional perceptions and broader societal inequalities, with trust in doctors emerging as a particularly strong psychosocial resource.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Health Services Research
Published
2026-06-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-026-14948-7
Primary Topic
Mental Health Treatment and Access
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Psychological distress and trust in healthcare: individual perceptions and national contexts - a multilevel analysis

Juliane Heise
BMC Health Services Research
Mental Health Treatment and Access
article

Psychological distress and trust in healthcare: individual perceptions and national contexts - a multilevel analysis

Juliane Heise
article en

Abstract

Abstract Aim This study examines the association between trust in doctors, income-based perceived fairness, income-based access inequality in healthcare, and self-reported psychological distress, considering individual perceptions and country level socioeconomic context. Methods ISSP 2021 Health and Health Care data were analyzed ( N = 26 023; 21 countries). A multilevel logistic regression model was estimated. Country level indicators included income inequality (Gini coefficient), Human development index (HDI) and average confidence in the healthcare system. Results Compared with neutral trust, trusting doctors was associated with lower odds of distress (OR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.72–0.84), while distrust was associated with higher odds (OR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.01–1.30). Strong perceptions of healthcare injustice were associated with elevated distress, reflected in higher odds among those rating the system as very unfair (OR = 1.26 95% CI 1.16–1.37) and those perceiving access as harder for the poor (OR = 1.30 95% CI 1.20–1.41). At the country level, higher income inequality (OR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.10–1.44) was associated with higher distress, whereas HDI and average confidence in the healthcare system was not significantly related to distress. Discussion Overall, the findings highlight that psychological distress is closely linked to both individual-level institutional perceptions and broader societal inequalities, with trust in doctors emerging as a particularly strong psychosocial resource.

BMC Health Services Research
Chemnitz University of Technology (DE)
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Mental Health Treatment and Access
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.