OBJECTIVES: This study aims to identify shared perspectives among the general public of Korea regarding the allocation of limited healthcare resources using Q methodology.

METHODS: Candidate statements reflecting different viewpoints on healthcare resource allocation priority were derived by referencing previous studies and the results of a pre-conducted FGI. Following internal discussions, a total of 35 statements were selected. Q-sorting was conducted with 58 participants recruited considering gender, age, and regional proportions. During Q-sorting, participants placed the given set of statements into appropriate columns on a sorting frame based on the extent to which they believed each statement represented their own perspective. The data extracted from the Q-sorting was analyzed using QUANAL to identify common factors.

RESULTS: The analysis of sorted statements revealed four distinct viewpoints. Respondents classified as Type 1 showed a preference for equity over efficiency, advocating for equal opportunities and support for vulnerable individuals. They expressed opposition to ageism. Type 2 respondents displayed a clear utilitarian attitude, emphasizing productivity. Type 3 respondents emphasized equality and preferred not to have any form of differential distribution for any reason. Type 4 respondents demonstrated a prioritarian tendency, prioritizing emergency patients, individuals with higher severity, preventive measures, and areas with unmet needs. However, they also emphasized effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS: When classifying the study participants based on their shared perspectives, four broad groups emerged, commonly recognized as egalitarian, prioritarian, and utilitarian viewpoints. Priority decisions consider diverse social values, and understanding the distribution of perspectives within the population is expected to contribute to fair resource allocation decisions.