Public Preferences for a Unified Healthcare System in Korea: Generational and Ideological Insights

Public Preferences for a Unified Healthcare System in Korea: Generational and Ideological Insights | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Public Preferences for a Unified Healthcare System in Korea: Generational and Ideological Insights Ji-Young Son, Yuyi Park, Dong-Hun Han This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6337867/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background/Objectives: In the context of potential Korean unification, integrating South Korea’s robust but strained healthcare system with North Korea’s resource-deficient framework presents significant challenges. This study explores public preferences for a unified healthcare system, focusing on generational and ideological factors. Methods A total of 800 adults aged 19–59 were recruited using proportional quota sampling. Preferences for a unified healthcare system, perceptions of unification necessity, and expected personal benefits were analyzed using logistic regression, adjusting for age, gender, education level, subjective social status, and political ideology. Results This study examines age and political orientation in relation to healthcare preferences and perceptions of Korean reunification. Right-wing individuals in their 20s and 30s (OR: 2.41) and 40s and 50s (OR: 2.21) are more likely to favor maintaining the current healthcare system compared to non-political individuals in their 40s and 50s. Support for reunification is lower among 20s and 30s, especially right-wing (OR: 0.36) and non-political (OR: 0.46) groups, while left-wing individuals in their 40s and 50s (OR: 2.07) show stronger support. Perceived personal benefits from reunification are highest among left-wing individuals in their 20s and 30s (OR: 4.60) and 40s and 50s (OR: 2.97). These findings highlight the influence of demographic and political factors on key social attitudes. Conclusions Public preferences for a unified healthcare system are influenced by both pragmatic and ideological considerations. To ensure sustainable integration, healthcare policies must address generational and political divides while prioritizing equitable access and social cohesion in a unified Korea. Health Care Reform Reunification Unified Korea Intergenerational Relations Social Values Introduction In February 2024, a significant group of doctors, including medical residents, collectively resigned in South Korea to protest the government's proposed healthcare policies, marking a pivotal moment in the nation's medical history. At the center of the controversy was a plan to increase the annual intake of medical school students by 2,000, starting in 2025. Medical professionals have long emphasized that the sustainability of the healthcare system cannot be ensured without addressing systemic issues, such as inadequate working conditions and low remuneration in critical specialties like emergency medicine and surgery [ 1 ]. They argue that merely increasing the number of medical school seats will not resolve these fundamental problems. This crisis has led to a resurgence of interest in the deep-rooted challenges afflicting South Korea's healthcare system, including a high incidence of medical malpractice, mounting financial pressures on national health insurance, and inequities in the reimbursement system [ 2 ]. The healthcare insurance system of the Republic of Korea functions as a unified public insurance framework, providing coverage to the entire population and offering a relatively comprehensive array of medical services [ 3 , 4 ]. The system has historically benefited from beneficial demographic structures and economic growth, which have contributed to its development. Nevertheless, concerns regarding the system's sustainability have increased due to challenges such as conflicts between public and private healthcare sectors, declining birth rates, slowed economic growth, reimbursement issues, and population aging [ 5 , 6 ]. These issues have the potential to compromise the long-term sustainability of South Korea's healthcare insurance system, and it is likely that similar challenges may arise in a unified Korean healthcare system following potential reunification. Meanwhile, the healthcare system of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (here after North Korea) is based on socialist principles and aims to provide universal healthcare coverage. However, its practical implementation is severely impeded by economic challenges and a lack of resources [ 7 ]. The shortage of resources has resulted in outdated medical equipment and facilities, along with severe deficits in medical devices, drugs, and essential medicines. These deficiencies significantly hinder the ability of the North Korean population to access adequate medical care, with rural areas experiencing the greatest challenges in this regard [ 8 ]. In response, the North Korean government has undertaken large-scale modernization efforts and the construction of new central healthcare facilities in Pyongyang and other major cities. Nevertheless, access to these services remains restricted for the general population [ 9 ]. Moreover, the centralized nature of the healthcare system exacerbates the vulnerabilities of rural healthcare, leaving rural communities disproportionately disadvantaged [ 9 ]. Given the substandard state of North Korea's healthcare system [ 7 ], significant economic sacrifices from South Koreans are likely to be necessary following reunification. This will be a critical consideration in the design of a unified Korean healthcare system. The selection of an appropriate system must consider factors such as living standards, economic conditions, healthcare access and quality, and the social consensus of both Northern and Southern populations post-reunification. Additionally, exploring the most suitable model for healthcare integration will be essential to ensure a sustainable and equitable system. Recent years have witnessed a growing divide in generational perceptions of unification and increasing polarization between the political left and right in South Korean society. Tensions between younger and older generations over healthcare burdens, national pensions, and real estate and housing issues have intensified [ 10 ]. Generational differences are also evident in attitudes toward key countries, including North Korea, the United States, China, and Japan [ 11 – 13 ]. These conflicts are not unique to Korea but reflect broader global trends. In Europe, far-right parties are gaining prominence [ 14 ], while political tensions in the United States surrounding former President Donald Trump have intensified, culminating during the 2024 presidential election [ 15 ]. These domestic and international dynamics underscore the challenges of fostering social cohesion and political consensus in the post-unification era [ 16 ]. This study aims to contribute to the development of integrated healthcare policies in the aftermath of Korean unification by analyzing public preferences for a unified healthcare system. Specifically, given the evolving perceptions of unification among the younger generation in recent years [ 17 , 18 ], this study examines how preferences for a healthcare system may differ between residents of the two Koreas after unification. To achieve this, it analyzes differences in healthcare system preferences based on socioeconomic variables such as gender, age, region, educational attainment, social status, and political ideology. By providing essential data to facilitate social consensus among South Korean residents, this study seeks to inform the policy-making process for a post-unification healthcare system. Furthermore, it is expected to make a significant contribution to the development of targeted and effective healthcare policies that promote social integration in a unified Korea. Methods Study design and population This study recruited 800 adult participants aged 19 to 59 years using proportional quota sampling based on region, gender, and age composition ratios, conducted between September 5 and September 26, 2022. Participants under 19 and over 60 were excluded, considering the low probability of Korean unification in the short term and the likelihood that the primary economic burden would fall on the productive workforce, particularly younger and middle-aged generations. By excluding the elderly population, the study focuses on the perceptions of those expected to assume substantial economic responsibilities and social roles during the unification process. The survey was conducted by a professional agency commissioned by the research team, adhering strictly to the protection of respondents' personal information. Survey Evaluation The evaluation survey was developed based on the Unification Perception Survey questionnaire by the Seoul National University Institute for Peace and Unification Studies [ 19 ]. The questionnaire, developed specifically for this study based on relevant literature and expert input, is provided as a supplementary file (Supplementary File 1). The research team assessed its content validity. The finalized version was distributed via SMS, allowing participants to access the survey through a link included in the message. Data collection was outsourced to an external survey agency and continued until responses were obtained from a panel of 800 participants. The general characteristics included gender, age, residential area, level of education, occupational status, subjective social status, and political party affiliation. Gender was classified as "male" or "female." Age groups were defined as "20–29 years," "30–39 years," "40–49 years," and "50–59 years," and for analytical purposes, further divided into "20s and 30s" and "40s and 50s." Residential areas were categorized as "Seoul," "metropolitan area (Incheon/Gyeonggi)," and "other regions (Daejeon/Sejong/Chungcheong, Gwangju/Jeolla, Daegu/Gyeongbuk, Busan/Ulsan/Gyeongnam, Gangwon/Jeju)." These were further divided into "Seoul and metropolitan area" and "other regions." Education levels were grouped into "middle school graduate or below," "high school graduate," "associate degree," "university graduate," and "graduate school degree or higher," and further divided into "high school graduate or below" and "university graduate or higher" for analysis. Occupational status was categorized according to the Korean Standard Classification of Occupations and subsequently grouped into "blue-collar" and "white-collar" categories. Subjective social status was evaluated using a 10-rung ladder scale, where participants visually indicated their perceived social class position, ranging from the "1st rung" (lowest class) to the "10th rung" (highest class). Political party affiliation was assessed as "People Power Party," "Democratic Party of Korea," "Justice Party," "other parties," or "no party affiliation," and these were further divided into "conservative," "progressive," and "none." The perception of the need for Korean reunification was assessed using three response options: "necessary," "neutral," and "unnecessary." Perceived benefits after reunification were categorized as "beneficial" or "not beneficial." Preferences for the medical system in a unified Korea were evaluated through the question, "What type of medical system do you think Unified Korea should adopt?" with the following response options: "Maintain South Korea's current medical system," "Develop a hybrid medical system combining elements from both South and North Korea," "Retain separate medical systems for South and North Korea," and "Any system is acceptable as long as reunification is achieved." For analytical purposes, the responses "Maintain South Korea's current medical system," "Retain separate medical systems for South and North Korea," and "Any system is acceptable as long as reunification is achieved" were grouped into "preference for maintaining South Korea's existing medical system," while "Develop a hybrid medical system combining elements from both South and North Korea" was redefined as "preference for modifying South Korea's existing medical system." Statistical analysis This study employed descriptive statistical analysis to identify the general characteristics of the participants. Cross-tabulation analysis and logistic regression analysis were conducted to examine the relationship between characteristics and preferences for the Unified Korea healthcare system. Logistic regression analysis was also used to assess the odds ratios (ORs) for preferences for the Unified Korea healthcare system, perceived personal benefits of Korean reunification, and the perceived need for Korean reunification. The independent variables included generational groups and political party support, while the dependent variables were the perceived need for reunification, perceived benefits after reunification, and preferences for the healthcare system after reunification. In the logistic regression models, Model 1 represented the crude model, Model 2 was adjusted for age and gender, and Model 3 was further adjusted for age, gender, highest level of education, subjective social status, and occupational status. Statistical significance was defined as a p-value of ≤ 0.05. Data handling and model analyses were conducted using SPSS version 24.0. Results Sociodemographic and General Characteristics of Study Participants Table 1 shows the general characteristics of the 800 study participants. The gender distribution was nearly equal, with 409 males (51.1%) and 391 females (48.9%). The largest age group was 50–59 years, accounting for 232 participants (29.0%). In terms of residential areas, 155 participants (19.4%) lived in Seoul and the metropolitan area, while 645 participants (80.6%) resided in other regions. Most participants (83.1%) had a university degree or higher. Regarding political party affiliation, the largest proportion of respondents reported no party affiliation (49.6%), followed by support for the Democratic Party of Korea (28.6%) and the People Power Party (18.5%). Subjective social status was assessed using a 10-point ladder scale, with the most frequently reported score being 5 (22.9%). Occupation analysis showed that a significant proportion of participants were white-collar workers (66.8%). Regarding perceptions of Korean reunification, 47.1% of participants indicated that reunification is necessary, yet 57.8% believed it would result in personal disadvantages. The most preferred healthcare system after reunification was a hybrid model combining elements of South and North Korea, chosen by 369 participants (46.1%). Table 1 Sociodemographic and General Characteristics of Study Participants Characteristics Frequency N (%) Gender Male 409 (51.1) Female 391 (48.9) Total 800 (100.0) Age 20–29 175 (21.9) 30–39 178 (22.3) 40–49 215 (26.9) 50–59 232 (29.0) Total 800 (100.0) Residential area Seoul and Metropolitan Area 155 (19.4) Other 645 (80.6) Total 800 (100.0) Education ≤High school 135 (16.9) ≥College or more 665 (83.1) Total 800 (100.0) Political spectrum Right-wing 148 (18.5) Left-wing 255 (31.9) Not applicable 397 (49.6) Total 800 (100.0) Subjective social status 1 32 (4.0) 2 38 (4.8) 3 92 (11.5) 4 120 (15.0) 5 183 (22.9) 6 166 (20.8) 7 103 (12.9) 8 41 (5.1) 9 14 (1.8) 10 11 (1.4) Total 800 (100.0) Occupational classification White-collar 534 (66.8) Blue-collar 91 (11.4) Total 625 (100.0) Need of Korean Reunification Need 377 (47.1) No need 423 (52.9) Total 800 (100.0) Reunification Benefits Personally Benefit 338 (42.3) Disadvantage 462 (57.8) Total 800 (100.0) Healthcare system for unified Korea Maintain South Korea's current healthcare system 255 (31.9) Compromise between South and North Korean systems 369 (46.1) Maintain separate systems for South and North Korea 106 (13.3) No preference 70 (8.8) Total 800 (100.0) Characteristics of Unified Korea Healthcare System Preferences (Dependent Variable: Maintain South Korea's Current Healthcare System) Table 2 shows preferences for changes in the healthcare system of a unified Korea based on participants' general characteristics. Younger participants aged 20–29 years demonstrated a significantly higher preference for maintaining the South Korean healthcare system compared to those aged 50–59 years (OR = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.12–2.50). Similarly, participants residing in Seoul and the metropolitan area were significantly more likely to prefer maintaining the South Korean system than those residing in other regions (OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.02–2.08). Participants with a high school education or below were significantly more likely to prefer maintaining the South Korean system compared to those with a university degree or higher (OR = 1.51, 95% CI: 1.03–2.21). Regarding political orientation, individuals with conservative tendencies were significantly more likely to favor maintaining the South Korean healthcare system than those with progressive tendencies (OR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.17–2.56). Subjective social status also affected preferences; participants in higher perceived social classes tended to favor maintaining the South Korean system, while those in the middle class (3rd to 6th rung) were more likely to support modifying the healthcare system. Perceptions of the necessity for Korean reunification significantly influenced preferences (p < 0.001). Those who perceived reunification as necessary were more likely to favor modifying the system compared to those who did not (OR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.42–2.50). Additionally, participants who expected personal disadvantages from reunification were more likely to prefer maintaining the South Korean system than those who expected personal benefits (OR = 1.37, 95% CI: 1.03–1.81). Table 2 Characteristics of Unified Korea Healthcare System Preferences (Dependent Variable: Maintain South Korea's Current Healthcare System) Characteristics Frequency N (%) P-value OR (95% CI) Healthcare system for unified Korea Maintain South Korea's current healthcare system Change South Korea's healthcare system Gender 0.423 Male 226 (55.3) 183 (44.7) 1.12 (0.85–1.48) Female 205 (52.4) 186 (47.6) 1.00 (Reference) Age 0.041* 20–29 111 (63.4) 64 (36.6) 1.68 (1.12–2.50) 30–39 91 (51.1) 87 (48.9) 1.01 (0.68–1.49) 40–49 111 (51.6) 104 (48.4) 1.03 (0.71–1.50) 50–59 118 (50.9) 114 (49.1) 1.00 (Reference) Residential area 0.039* Seoul and Metropolitan Area 95 (61.3) 60 (38.7) 1.46 (1.02–2.08) Other 336 (52.1) 309 (47.9) 1.00 (Reference) Education 0.033* ≤High school 84 (62.2) 51 (37.8) 1.51 (1.03–2.21) ≥College or more 347 (52.2) 318 (47.8) 1.00 (Reference) Political spectrum 0.005 Right-wing 97 (65.5) 51 (34.5) 1.73 (1.17–2.56) Left-wing 126 (49.4) 129 (50.6) 0.89 (0.65–1.22) Not applicable 208 (52.4) 189 (47.6) 1.00 (Reference) Subjective social status 1 24 (75.0) 8 (25.0) 0.033 1.00 (Reference) 2 21 (55.3) 17 (44.7) 0.41 (0.15–1.15) 3 42 (45.7) 50 (54.3) 0.28 (0.11–0.69) 4 66 (55.0) 54 (45.0) 0.41 (0.17–0.98) 5 86 (47.0) 97 (53.0) 0.30 (0.16–0.89) 6 88 (53.0) 78 (47.0) 0.38 (0.16–0.89) 7 63 (61.2) 40 (38.8) 0.53 (0.22–1.28) 8 23 (56.1) 18 (43.9) 0.43 (0.16–1.17) 9 9 (64.3) 5 (35.7) 0.60 (0.16–2.33) 10 9 (81.8) 2 (18.2) 1.50 (0.27–8.45) Occupational classification 0.687 Blue-collar 52 (57.1) 39 (42.9) 1.10 (0.70–1.72) White-collar 293 (54.9) 241 (45.1) 1.00 (Reference) Need of Korean Reunification < 0.001* Need 172 (45.6) 205 (54.4) 1.88 (1.42–2.50) No need 259 (61.2) 164 (38.8) 1.00 (Reference) Reunification Benefits Personally 0.03* Disadvantage 264 (57.1) 198 (42.9) 1.37 (1.03–1.81) Benefit 167 (49.4) 171 (50.6) 1.00 (Reference) Significant associations in bold, *P < 0.05, OR = odds ratio, CI = confidence interval Association Between Age Groups, Political Orientation, and Perceived Need for Korean Reunification Table 3 shows the differences in perceptions of reunification necessity by age group and political orientations. The left-leaning group in their 40s and 50s exhibited the strongest perception of the necessity of reunification, which remained statistically significant after adjusting for all confounding variables (OR = 2.07). Conversely, the right-leaning group in their 20s and 30s demonstrated a negative perception of reunification necessity, consistently considering it unnecessary even after adjusting for all confounding variables (OR = 0.36). The left-leaning group in their 20s and 30s showed a tendency to support reunification; however, this association was not statistically significant after adjustment. Similarly, individuals in their 20s and 30s with no political affiliation displayed a negative perception of reunification necessity (OR = 0.46). Table 3 Association Between Age Groups, Political Orientation, and Preference for a Unified Korean Healthcare System Odds Ratio (95% confidence interval) Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 20s30s, right (N = 68) 0.53 (0.30–0.96) 0.42 (0.22–0.82) 0.36 (0.18–0.72) 40s50s, right (N = 80) 1.03 (0.61–1.73) 0.92 (0.54–1.57) 0.84 (0.48–1.47) 20s30s, left (N = 92) 1.94 (1.18–3.22) 1.64 (0.92–2.90) 1.47 (0.80–2.68) 40s50s, left (N = 163) 2.22 (1.45–3.39) 2.12 (1.38–3.26) 2.07 (1.33–3.22) 20s30s, none (N = 193) 0.58 (0.39–0.87) 0.49 (0.29–0.81) 0.46 (0.27–0.79) 40s50s, none (N = 204) 1.00 (Reference) 1.00 (Reference) 1.00 (Reference) Significant associations in bold, Dependent variable: Need for unification. Model 1 was a crude model Model 2 was adjusted for age, sex Model 3 was adjusted for age, sex, education, subjective social status, occupational status Association Between Age Groups, Political Orientation, and Personal Benefits of Korean Reunification Table 4 presents the differences in perceptions of personal benefits from reunification across age groups and political orientations. The left-leaning group in their 20s and 30s, as well as those in their 40s and 50s, demonstrated a strong tendency to perceive reunification as personally beneficial. Notably, the left-leaning group in their 20s and 30s maintained a significant perception of personal benefits even after adjusting for all confounding variables (OR = 4.60), while the left-leaning group in their 40s and 50s also showed statistically significant results (OR = 2.97). In contrast, the right-leaning groups in both age categories (20s and 30s, 40s and 50s) reported relatively low perceptions of reunification as personally beneficial, with no statistically significant findings. Similarly, participants with no political affiliation did not exhibit a clear tendency to perceive reunification as personally beneficial. In contrast, the right-leaning groups in both age categories (20s and 30s, 40s and 50s) reported relatively low perceptions of reunification as personally beneficial, with no statistically significant findings. Similarly, participants with no political affiliation did not exhibit a clear tendency to perceive reunification as personally beneficial. Table 4 Association Between Age Groups, Political Orientation, and Personal Benefits of Korean Reunification Odds Ratio (95% confidence interval) Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 20s30s, right (N = 68) 1.51 (0.85–2.67) 1.64 (0.86–3.13) 1.45 (0.74–2.84) 40s50s, right (N = 80) 1.37 (0.80–2.36) 1.23 (0.71–2.13) 0.96 (0.54–1.71) 20s30s, left (N = 92) 4.10 (2.43–6.89) 4.71 (2.59–8.54) 4.60 (2.45–8.63) 40s50s, left (N = 163) 3.12 (2.03–4.80) 2.93 (1.89–4.54) 2.97 (1.89–4.67) 20s30s, none (N = 193) 1.19 (0.78–1.81) 1.39 (0.82–2.34) 1.33 (0.77–2.30) 40s50s, none (N = 204) 1.00 (Reference) 1.00 (Reference) 1.00 (Reference) Note: Significant associations in bold. Dependent variable: Personal belief that reunification is beneficial to oneself Model 1 was a crude model Model 2 was adjusted for age, sex Model 3 was adjusted for age, sex, education, subjective social status, occupational status Association Between Age Groups, Political Orientation, and Preference for a Unified Korean Healthcare System Table 5 shows the differences in preferences for the healthcare system of a unified Korea based on age groups and political orientations. The right-leaning groups in both their 20s and 30s and those in their 40s and 50s showed a strong preference for maintaining South Korea's current healthcare system. Notably, the right-leaning group in their 20s and 30s demonstrated a significantly higher likelihood of preferring the current system even after adjusting for all confounding variables (OR = 2.41), and a similar trend was observed among the right-leaning group in their 40s and 50s (OR = 2.21). In contrast, the left-leaning groups in their 20s and 30s and those in their 40s and 50s did not show any significant differences in their preference for maintaining South Korea's current healthcare system. Additionally, individuals in their 20s and 30s with no political affiliation displayed a slight preference for maintaining the current system; however, this association was not statistically significant after adjusting for all confounding variables. Table 5 Association Between Age Groups, Political Orientation, and Preference for a Unified Korean Healthcare System Odds Ratio (95% confidence interval) Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 20s30s, right (N = 68) 2.35 (1.32–4.19) 1.89 (1.01–3.57) 2.41 (1.23–4.70) 40s50s, right (N = 80) 1.98 (1.16–3.37) 1.95 (1.15–3.33) 2.21 (1.25–3.91) 20s30s, left (N = 92) 1.03 (0.63–1.69) 0.84 (0.48–1.47) 1.01 (0.56–1.84) 40s50s, left (N = 163) 1.14 (0.75–1.72) 1.13 (0.74–1.70) 1.15 (0.75–1.78) 20s30s, none (N = 193) 1.56 (1.05–2.31) 1.21 (0.74–1.97) 1.65 (0.98–2.79) 40s50s, none (N = 204) 1.00 (Reference) 1.00 (Reference) 1.00 (Reference) Note: Significant associations in bold. Dependent variable: Preference for not changing the South Korean healthcare system. Model 1 was a crude model Model 2 was adjusted for age, sex Model 3 was adjusted for age, sex, education, subjective social status, occupational status Discussion This study examined the influence of various factors associated with Korean reunification on preferences for South Korea's healthcare system and perceptions of reunification necessity. The findings indicate that ideological perceptions of reunification necessity are strongly associated with age groups, with older individuals consistently showing a stronger recognition of its importance, regardless of political orientation. Statistically, this trend reflects generational differences. As the proportion of younger generations grows and the older population declines, an overall decrease in the perception of reunification as necessary becomes evident. Previous studies suggest that perceptions of reunification have gradually declined over time due to generational effects, a trend consistent with recent national surveys on reunification perceptions [ 19 , 20 ]. Conversely, individuals in their 20s and 30s, regardless of political ideology, were more likely than those in their 40s and 50s to perceive reunification as personally beneficial. Notably, the 20s and 30s cohort share a relatively strong perception of North and South Korea as originally separate nations. Additionally, their political ideologies tend to lean toward conservatism. This aligns with recent political developments in North Korea, such as a directive by Kim Jong-un, the young leader of North Korea, in January 2024 to cease using the term "unification," reflecting an internal shift toward viewing North and South Korea as distinct independent states. Recent surveys also indicate a growing negative perception of reunification necessity in South Korea. In one survey, 35.0% of respondents stated that reunification is unnecessary, the highest percentage recorded since the survey began in 2007 [ 19 ]. This negative sentiment was particularly prominent among younger generations in their 20s and 30s. These attitudes can be attributed to rising hostility toward North Korea and an increasing distrust in inter-Korean relations. The finding that a pragmatic approach—where unification is perceived as personally and socially beneficial or at least not harmful—is supported across all age groups and political ideologies has significant implications. Specifically, phased economic measures and integrative policy designs are crucial to mitigating socioeconomic disparities and achieving stable system integration post-unification. Previous studies have emphasized that the economic costs of unification should not be viewed merely as a financial burden [ 21 ]. Instead, they should be framed as a strategic foundation for strengthening social trust and cohesion, highlighting the need for complementary economic and social integration efforts [ 21 ]. Furthermore, evidence from Eastern European countries demonstrates that improvements in health indicators cannot be achieved solely through the expansion of healthcare services [ 22 ].This finding highlights the potential severity of health-related challenges in the North Korean region following unification[ 22 ].Addressing these challenges will require simultaneous efforts to enhance healthcare systems and build social trust. Such measures should be implemented as integral components of broader political and social integration strategies. Moreover, given that support for unification policies is shaped not only by economic benefits but also by citizens' political orientations and social beliefs, it is crucial to incorporate diverse values and preferences into post-unification policy design [ 23 ]. This consideration is particularly significant for the establishment of a unified healthcare system. In conclusion, it is essential that discussions on unification move beyond ideological divisions and center on promoting economic and social pragmatism. which should serve as a foundational principle in the formulation of unification policies. These findings highlight that perceptions of the necessity of unification are not solely tied to attitudes toward unification itself but also reflect broader preferences for political and socioeconomic systems. This dynamic is equally relevant to the design of a unified healthcare system. Therefore, concerted policy efforts aimed at mitigating and reconciling ideological divisions are indispensable in the development of a healthcare system for a unified Korea. Strengths and limitations This study has several limitations. First, the sample was restricted to individuals aged 19 to 60, excluding those younger than 19 and older than 60, and thus does not capture the unique perspectives of all age groups. This exclusion should be carefully considered when interpreting the findings, as older adults, especially, may possess pivotal perspectives on reunification and the healthcare system. Second, as a survey-based study, the results are subject to potential biases, including respondents' subjective perceptions and social desirability bias. Participants may have provided responses that do not fully align with their true beliefs, especially regarding the sensitive topic of North-South Korean reunification. Finally, the cross-sectional design, which relied on data collected at a single point in time, limits the ability to examine temporal changes in perceptions or assess the impact of specific events. Addressing these gaps will require further longitudinal research to provide a more comprehensive understanding. Nevertheless, this study confirms that perceptions of Korean unification are shaped by a complex interplay of pragmatic and ideological factors, rather than being solely determined by individual attributes such as political ideology or age. Notably, while younger generations often perceive unification as unrealistic, their skepticism appears to stem more from negative perceptions of North Korea itself than from concerns about the socioeconomic burdens of unification, challenging common assumptions [ 24 ]. Building on previous research suggesting that fostering empathy with North Korea and its residents, along with increasing exposure to North Korea-related experiences, can improve positive perceptions of unification, targeted efforts are required to enhance understanding and reduce biases [ 25 ].In the context of designing a unified healthcare system and formulating related policies, integrative approaches and inclusive strategies are crucial for addressing generational and ideological differences in perceptions of unification. To promote social integration after unification, it is crucial to develop effective strategies for utilizing North Korea's healthcare workforce at each stage of establishing a unified health insurance system, as highlighted in previous studies [ 26 ]. Key strategies include establishing a central administrative body for health management, expanding inter-Korean exchanges, introducing a unified national licensing examination system, increasing enrollment capacities and establishing new educational institutions in the North, permitting private medical practices in the North, implementing a “dispersed medical workforce” system in the South, and expanding public healthcare personnel [ 26 ]. These measures not only provide the foundation for a sustainable healthcare system in a unified Korea but also foster an inclusive environment where all social groups, particularly vulnerable populations, can access healthcare comprehensively. Conclusion This study revealed that both age and political orientation significantly influence public preferences for a unified Korean healthcare system and perceptions of reunification. Right-leaning were more likely to prefer maintaining South Korea’s current healthcare system, while support for reunification was lower among younger right-leaning and non-affiliated individuals. In contrast, left-leaning individuals in their 40s and 50s expressed stronger support for reunification, and those in their 20s and 30s perceived the highest personal benefits. These findings suggest that future healthcare integration policies in a unified Korea must address generational and ideological divides. A tailored, inclusive approach will be essential to foster public consensus and ensure the long-term sustainability and equity of the healthcare system post-unification. Declarations Ethics approval The Institutional Review Board (IRB) and Ethics Committee of Seoul National University School of Dentistry approved the study protocol (IRB No. S-D20230020), which was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants agreed to the study procedures and gave informed consent. Availability of data and materials Not applicable (this manuscript does not report data generation or analysis) Competing interests policy No, I declare that the authors have no competing interests as defined by BMC, or other interests that might be perceived to influence the results and/or discussion reported in this paper. Funding This research was financially supported by the Institute for Peace and Unification Studies at Seoul National University under the project titled “Laying the Groundwork for Unification and Peace". And this research was also supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF) grant funded by the Korea government(ME) (No. 350-20240050) Author Contributions Conceptualization: Son JY, Park YY, Han DH. Data curation: Park YY, Han DH. Formal analysis: Son JY, Han DH. Funding acquisition: Han DH. Investigation: Park YY, Han DH. Methodology: Son JY, Han DH. Software: Son JY, Han DH. Validation: Son JY, Han DH. Visualization: Son JY. Writing - original draft: Son JY. Writing - review & editing: Son JY, Park YY, Han DH. References Choi SK. The view of emergency medicine physician over the Korean Emergency Medical System: Problems and improvements. Public Health Aff. 2019;3(1):177-183. Yoon JH, Kwon IH, Park HW. The South Korean health-care system in crisis. Lancet. 2024 Jun 15;403(10444):2589. Lee TJ, Hwang I, Kim HL. Equity of health care financing in South Korea: 1990-2016. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Dec 11;21(1):1327. Kim MJ. Unintended consequences of healthcare reform in South Korea: Evidence from a regression discontinuity in time design. Health Res Policy Syst. 2023 Jun 22;21(1):60. Yeo JY, Kim HR. Assessment of Korea health care system performance during 2000-2010. Korean J Health Econ Policy. 2014;20(4):123-144. Cho JY, Jeong HS. The effect of population ageing on healthcare expenditure in Korea: From the perspective of ‘healthy ageing’ using age-period-cohort analysis. Health Policy Manag. 2018;28(4):378-391. Yoon HJ, Woo SH, Kim D, Um JH, Park SH, Seo AR. Changes in medical research trends of North Korea after economic sanctions: A PRISMA-compliant systematic literature review of North Korean medical journals. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Jul;98(29):e16500. Lee MJ, Kim HN, Cho DB, et al. Overview of healthcare system in North Korea. J Korean Med Assoc. 2013;56:358-567. Mun IC. Seoul-Pyongyang health and medical cooperation study. Seoul: The Seoul Institute; 2021. Yoon MJ. The study of ideological conflict and its characteristic in Korea. J Humanit Soc Sci. 2017;8(5):831-850. Lee MY. Korean younger generation's perception of China and Japan: Focusing on the fact-checking of Korean media reports. J Peace Unif Stud. 2023;15(1):289-319. Kim HN, Park WH. Perceptions of unification, North Korea, and acceptance of North Korean refugees among the young generation. Korean Polit Sci Rev. 2023;57(4):59-89. Song S, Lee JM. The analysis of perception of perennial countries on the Korean Peninsula by generation: A study on the possibility of overlap between South-South conflict and generation conflict. Soc Sci Res Int. 2019;43(1):117-141. Gerbaudo P. Angry posts mobilize: Emotional communication and online mobilization in the Facebook pages of Western European right-wing populist leaders. Social Media Stud. 2023;9(9):1-18. Harris and Trump embrace tariffs, though their approaches differ. New York Times. 2024 Aug 27. Kim TH, Kang HW. A study on South Koreans’ response to the U.S. presidential election and changes in trade policy. J CEO Manag Stud. 2024;27(4):223-241. Kwon Y, Lee KS. Revisiting inter-Korean events and South Koreans’ perception of unification. Soc Sci Q. 2024;1-17. The Institute for Peace and Unification Studies, Seoul National University. Unification perception survey report. Siheung-si, Gyeonggi-do: Institute for Peace and Unification Studies; 2024. Available from: https://ipus.snu.ac.kr/data-archive The Institute for Peace and Unification Studies, Seoul National University. Unification perception survey. 2024. Available from: https://ipus.snu.ac.kr/blog/archives/research_cat/unification_perception-survey The Institute for Peace and Unification Studies, Seoul National University. Unification perception survey. 2007. Available from: https://ipus.snu.ac.kr/blog/archives/research_cat/unification_perception-survey Hong KS, Lee KH, Park SH. Economic challenges and solutions in the process of unification on the Korean Peninsula. Int Promot Agency Cult Technol. 2024;10(4):437-442. Joo YJ, Heo SE, Lee JE. The implications on the healthcare system of unified Korea: Lessons from system integration countries. Health Policy Manag. 2020;30(3):301-310. Lee HY, Choi HS, Kwon YM, Park JH. Social beliefs, attitudes toward unification, and support for unification policies. Korean J Soc Personal Psychol. 2021;35(4):27-47. Ko KY, Kim TB. Hope and skepticism: Analysis of Z-generation’s unification skepticism. Natl Strategy. 2024;30(4):217-247. Kim NY. Relationship between contact with North Korea and North Korean settlers and perceptions of unification: Mediator effect of intimacy and perception. J Korea Content Assoc. 2021;21(8):489-497. Jeong HS, Shin HW, Lee KS, Lee GS. Designing health insurance systems for unified Korea. Health Insur Policy. 2014;13(2):9-21. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Supplementaryfile1UnifiedHealthcareSurveyEnglish.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6337867","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":444489844,"identity":"d6db00f1-ccc2-46b2-9fa3-458739d32c1f","order_by":0,"name":"Ji-Young Son","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Department of Preventive and Social Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ji-Young","middleName":"","lastName":"Son","suffix":""},{"id":444489845,"identity":"0fab9da9-05d2-4bcf-9424-2dba1a9cec8d","order_by":1,"name":"Yuyi Park","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Department of Dental Education, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yuyi","middleName":"","lastName":"Park","suffix":""},{"id":444489846,"identity":"64d3179d-7b0a-43aa-b070-2dda5795871f","order_by":2,"name":"Dong-Hun Han","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Department of Preventive and Social Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Dong-Hun","middleName":"","lastName":"Han","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-03-30 10:08:14","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6337867/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6337867/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":87581701,"identity":"fc721971-aa48-4790-add2-70573e19f5e1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-25 13:02:13","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1378214,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6337867/v1/ff8af305-4da0-4a6b-8d83-90cb14c5ed5d.pdf"},{"id":81289569,"identity":"fc026123-99f1-41a2-b03e-b7e1a99c7f71","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-24 11:38:23","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":141003,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Supplementaryfile1UnifiedHealthcareSurveyEnglish.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6337867/v1/3d9b5683c4cc556c52eb168c.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Public Preferences for a Unified Healthcare System in Korea: Generational and Ideological Insights","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn February 2024, a significant group of doctors, including medical residents, collectively resigned in South Korea to protest the government's proposed healthcare policies, marking a pivotal moment in the nation's medical history. At the center of the controversy was a plan to increase the annual intake of medical school students by 2,000, starting in 2025. Medical professionals have long emphasized that the sustainability of the healthcare system cannot be ensured without addressing systemic issues, such as inadequate working conditions and low remuneration in critical specialties like emergency medicine and surgery [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e]. They argue that merely increasing the number of medical school seats will not resolve these fundamental problems. This crisis has led to a resurgence of interest in the deep-rooted challenges afflicting South Korea's healthcare system, including a high incidence of medical malpractice, mounting financial pressures on national health insurance, and inequities in the reimbursement system [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe healthcare insurance system of the Republic of Korea functions as a unified public insurance framework, providing coverage to the entire population and offering a relatively comprehensive array of medical services [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e]. The system has historically benefited from beneficial demographic structures and economic growth, which have contributed to its development. Nevertheless, concerns regarding the system's sustainability have increased due to challenges such as conflicts between public and private healthcare sectors, declining birth rates, slowed economic growth, reimbursement issues, and population aging [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e]. These issues have the potential to compromise the long-term sustainability of South Korea's healthcare insurance system, and it is likely that similar challenges may arise in a unified Korean healthcare system following potential reunification.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMeanwhile, the healthcare system of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (here after North Korea) is based on socialist principles and aims to provide universal healthcare coverage. However, its practical implementation is severely impeded by economic challenges and a lack of resources [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e]. The shortage of resources has resulted in outdated medical equipment and facilities, along with severe deficits in medical devices, drugs, and essential medicines. These deficiencies significantly hinder the ability of the North Korean population to access adequate medical care, with rural areas experiencing the greatest challenges in this regard [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e]. In response, the North Korean government has undertaken large-scale modernization efforts and the construction of new central healthcare facilities in Pyongyang and other major cities. Nevertheless, access to these services remains restricted for the general population [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e]. Moreover, the centralized nature of the healthcare system exacerbates the vulnerabilities of rural healthcare, leaving rural communities disproportionately disadvantaged [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e]. Given the substandard state of North Korea's healthcare system [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e], significant economic sacrifices from South Koreans are likely to be necessary following reunification. This will be a critical consideration in the design of a unified Korean healthcare system. The selection of an appropriate system must consider factors such as living standards, economic conditions, healthcare access and quality, and the social consensus of both Northern and Southern populations post-reunification. Additionally, exploring the most suitable model for healthcare integration will be essential to ensure a sustainable and equitable system.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRecent years have witnessed a growing divide in generational perceptions of unification and increasing polarization between the political left and right in South Korean society. Tensions between younger and older generations over healthcare burdens, national pensions, and real estate and housing issues have intensified [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e]. Generational differences are also evident in attitudes toward key countries, including North Korea, the United States, China, and Japan [\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR12\" citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e]. These conflicts are not unique to Korea but reflect broader global trends. In Europe, far-right parties are gaining prominence [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e], while political tensions in the United States surrounding former President Donald Trump have intensified, culminating during the 2024 presidential election [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e]. These domestic and international dynamics underscore the challenges of fostering social cohesion and political consensus in the post-unification era [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study aims to contribute to the development of integrated healthcare policies in the aftermath of Korean unification by analyzing public preferences for a unified healthcare system. Specifically, given the evolving perceptions of unification among the younger generation in recent years [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e], this study examines how preferences for a healthcare system may differ between residents of the two Koreas after unification. To achieve this, it analyzes differences in healthcare system preferences based on socioeconomic variables such as gender, age, region, educational attainment, social status, and political ideology. By providing essential data to facilitate social consensus among South Korean residents, this study seeks to inform the policy-making process for a post-unification healthcare system. Furthermore, it is expected to make a significant contribution to the development of targeted and effective healthcare policies that promote social integration in a unified Korea.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStudy design and population\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e This study recruited 800 adult participants aged 19 to 59 years using proportional quota sampling based on region, gender, and age composition ratios, conducted between September 5 and September 26, 2022. Participants under 19 and over 60 were excluded, considering the low probability of Korean unification in the short term and the likelihood that the primary economic burden would fall on the productive workforce, particularly younger and middle-aged generations. By excluding the elderly population, the study focuses on the perceptions of those expected to assume substantial economic responsibilities and social roles during the unification process. The survey was conducted by a professional agency commissioned by the research team, adhering strictly to the protection of respondents' personal information.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eSurvey Evaluation\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe evaluation survey was developed based on the Unification Perception Survey questionnaire by the Seoul National University Institute for Peace and Unification Studies [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. The questionnaire, developed specifically for this study based on relevant literature and expert input, is provided as a supplementary file (Supplementary File 1). The research team assessed its content validity. The finalized version was distributed via SMS, allowing participants to access the survey through a link included in the message. Data collection was outsourced to an external survey agency and continued until responses were obtained from a panel of 800 participants.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe general characteristics included gender, age, residential area, level of education, occupational status, subjective social status, and political party affiliation. Gender was classified as \"male\" or \"female.\" Age groups were defined as \"20\u0026ndash;29 years,\" \"30\u0026ndash;39 years,\" \"40\u0026ndash;49 years,\" and \"50\u0026ndash;59 years,\" and for analytical purposes, further divided into \"20s and 30s\" and \"40s and 50s.\" Residential areas were categorized as \"Seoul,\" \"metropolitan area (Incheon/Gyeonggi),\" and \"other regions (Daejeon/Sejong/Chungcheong, Gwangju/Jeolla, Daegu/Gyeongbuk, Busan/Ulsan/Gyeongnam, Gangwon/Jeju).\" These were further divided into \"Seoul and metropolitan area\" and \"other regions.\" Education levels were grouped into \"middle school graduate or below,\" \"high school graduate,\" \"associate degree,\" \"university graduate,\" and \"graduate school degree or higher,\" and further divided into \"high school graduate or below\" and \"university graduate or higher\" for analysis. Occupational status was categorized according to the Korean Standard Classification of Occupations and subsequently grouped into \"blue-collar\" and \"white-collar\" categories. Subjective social status was evaluated using a 10-rung ladder scale, where participants visually indicated their perceived social class position, ranging from the \"1st rung\" (lowest class) to the \"10th rung\" (highest class). Political party affiliation was assessed as \"People Power Party,\" \"Democratic Party of Korea,\" \"Justice Party,\" \"other parties,\" or \"no party affiliation,\" and these were further divided into \"conservative,\" \"progressive,\" and \"none.\"\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe perception of the need for Korean reunification was assessed using three response options: \"necessary,\" \"neutral,\" and \"unnecessary.\" Perceived benefits after reunification were categorized as \"beneficial\" or \"not beneficial.\" Preferences for the medical system in a unified Korea were evaluated through the question, \"What type of medical system do you think Unified Korea should adopt?\" with the following response options: \"Maintain South Korea's current medical system,\" \"Develop a hybrid medical system combining elements from both South and North Korea,\" \"Retain separate medical systems for South and North Korea,\" and \"Any system is acceptable as long as reunification is achieved.\" For analytical purposes, the responses \"Maintain South Korea's current medical system,\" \"Retain separate medical systems for South and North Korea,\" and \"Any system is acceptable as long as reunification is achieved\" were grouped into \"preference for maintaining South Korea's existing medical system,\" while \"Develop a hybrid medical system combining elements from both South and North Korea\" was redefined as \"preference for modifying South Korea's existing medical system.\"\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStatistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study employed descriptive statistical analysis to identify the general characteristics of the participants. Cross-tabulation analysis and logistic regression analysis were conducted to examine the relationship between characteristics and preferences for the Unified Korea healthcare system. Logistic regression analysis was also used to assess the odds ratios (ORs) for preferences for the Unified Korea healthcare system, perceived personal benefits of Korean reunification, and the perceived need for Korean reunification.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe independent variables included generational groups and political party support, while the dependent variables were the perceived need for reunification, perceived benefits after reunification, and preferences for the healthcare system after reunification. In the logistic regression models, Model 1 represented the crude model, Model 2 was adjusted for age and gender, and Model 3 was further adjusted for age, gender, highest level of education, subjective social status, and occupational status. Statistical significance was defined as a p-value of \u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05. Data handling and model analyses were conducted using SPSS version 24.0.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSociodemographic and General Characteristics of Study Participants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e shows the general characteristics of the 800 study participants. The gender distribution was nearly equal, with 409 males (51.1%) and 391 females (48.9%). The largest age group was 50\u0026ndash;59 years, accounting for 232 participants (29.0%). In terms of residential areas, 155 participants (19.4%) lived in Seoul and the metropolitan area, while 645 participants (80.6%) resided in other regions. Most participants (83.1%) had a university degree or higher. Regarding political party affiliation, the largest proportion of respondents reported no party affiliation (49.6%), followed by support for the Democratic Party of Korea (28.6%) and the People Power Party (18.5%). Subjective social status was assessed using a 10-point ladder scale, with the most frequently reported score being 5 (22.9%). Occupation analysis showed that a significant proportion of participants were white-collar workers (66.8%). Regarding perceptions of Korean reunification, 47.1% of participants indicated that reunification is necessary, yet 57.8% believed it would result in personal disadvantages. The most preferred healthcare system after reunification was a hybrid model combining elements of South and North Korea, chosen by 369 participants (46.1%).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSociodemographic and General Characteristics of Study Participants\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCharacteristics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrequency N (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e409 (51.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e391 (48.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e800 (100.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20\u0026ndash;29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e175 (21.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30\u0026ndash;39\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e178 (22.3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40\u0026ndash;49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e215 (26.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50\u0026ndash;59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e232 (29.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e800 (100.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResidential area\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeoul and Metropolitan Area\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e155 (19.4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOther\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e645 (80.6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e800 (100.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;High school\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e135 (16.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ge;College or more\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e665 (83.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e800 (100.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePolitical spectrum\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRight-wing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e148 (18.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLeft-wing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e255 (31.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNot applicable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e397 (49.6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e800 (100.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubjective social status\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32 (4.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e38 (4.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e92 (11.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e120 (15.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e183 (22.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e166 (20.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e103 (12.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e41 (5.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14 (1.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11 (1.4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e800 (100.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupational classification\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhite-collar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e534 (66.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBlue-collar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e91 (11.4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e625 (100.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNeed of Korean Reunification\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNeed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e377 (47.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo need\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e423 (52.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e800 (100.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReunification Benefits Personally\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBenefit\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e338 (42.3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDisadvantage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e462 (57.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e800 (100.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHealthcare system for unified Korea\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaintain South Korea's current healthcare system\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e255 (31.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCompromise between South and North Korean systems\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e369 (46.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaintain separate systems for South and North Korea\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e106 (13.3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo preference\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e70 (8.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e800 (100.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eCharacteristics of Unified Korea Healthcare System Preferences (Dependent Variable: Maintain South Korea's Current Healthcare System)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e shows preferences for changes in the healthcare system of a unified Korea based on participants' general characteristics. Younger participants aged 20\u0026ndash;29 years demonstrated a significantly higher preference for maintaining the South Korean healthcare system compared to those aged 50\u0026ndash;59 years (OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.68, 95% CI: 1.12\u0026ndash;2.50). Similarly, participants residing in Seoul and the metropolitan area were significantly more likely to prefer maintaining the South Korean system than those residing in other regions (OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.46, 95% CI: 1.02\u0026ndash;2.08). Participants with a high school education or below were significantly more likely to prefer maintaining the South Korean system compared to those with a university degree or higher (OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.51, 95% CI: 1.03\u0026ndash;2.21). Regarding political orientation, individuals with conservative tendencies were significantly more likely to favor maintaining the South Korean healthcare system than those with progressive tendencies (OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.73, 95% CI: 1.17\u0026ndash;2.56). Subjective social status also affected preferences; participants in higher perceived social classes tended to favor maintaining the South Korean system, while those in the middle class (3rd to 6th rung) were more likely to support modifying the healthcare system. Perceptions of the necessity for Korean reunification significantly influenced preferences (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Those who perceived reunification as necessary were more likely to favor modifying the system compared to those who did not (OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.88, 95% CI: 1.42\u0026ndash;2.50). Additionally, participants who expected personal disadvantages from reunification were more likely to prefer maintaining the South Korean system than those who expected personal benefits (OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.37, 95% CI: 1.03\u0026ndash;1.81).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCharacteristics of Unified Korea Healthcare System Preferences (Dependent Variable: Maintain South Korea's Current Healthcare System)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCharacteristics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrequency N (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eP-value\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOR (95% CI)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHealthcare system for unified Korea\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaintain South Korea's current healthcare system\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChange South Korea's healthcare system\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.423\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e226 (55.3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e183 (44.7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.12 (0.85\u0026ndash;1.48)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e205 (52.4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e186 (47.6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.041*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20\u0026ndash;29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e111 (63.4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e64 (36.6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.68 (1.12\u0026ndash;2.50)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30\u0026ndash;39\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e91 (51.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e87 (48.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.01 (0.68\u0026ndash;1.49)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40\u0026ndash;49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e111 (51.6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e104 (48.4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.03 (0.71\u0026ndash;1.50)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50\u0026ndash;59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e118 (50.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e114 (49.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResidential area\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.039*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeoul and Metropolitan Area\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95 (61.3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e60 (38.7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.46 (1.02\u0026ndash;2.08)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOther\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e336 (52.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e309 (47.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.033*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026le;High school\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e84 (62.2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51 (37.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.51 (1.03\u0026ndash;2.21)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ge;College or more\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e347 (52.2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e318 (47.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePolitical spectrum\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.005\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRight-wing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e97 (65.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51 (34.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.73 (1.17\u0026ndash;2.56)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLeft-wing\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e126 (49.4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e129 (50.6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.89 (0.65\u0026ndash;1.22)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNot applicable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e208 (52.4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e189 (47.6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubjective social status\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24 (75.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8 (25.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.033\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21 (55.3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17 (44.7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.41 (0.15\u0026ndash;1.15)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e42 (45.7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50 (54.3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.28 (0.11\u0026ndash;0.69)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e66 (55.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e54 (45.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.41 (0.17\u0026ndash;0.98)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e86 (47.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e97 (53.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.30 (0.16\u0026ndash;0.89)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e88 (53.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e78 (47.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.38 (0.16\u0026ndash;0.89)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e63 (61.2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40 (38.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.53 (0.22\u0026ndash;1.28)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23 (56.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18 (43.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.43 (0.16\u0026ndash;1.17)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9 (64.3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5 (35.7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.60 (0.16\u0026ndash;2.33)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9 (81.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2 (18.2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.50 (0.27\u0026ndash;8.45)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupational classification\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.687\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBlue-collar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52 (57.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39 (42.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.10 (0.70\u0026ndash;1.72)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhite-collar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e293 (54.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e241 (45.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNeed of Korean Reunification\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNeed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e172 (45.6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e205 (54.4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.88 (1.42\u0026ndash;2.50)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo need\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e259 (61.2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e164 (38.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReunification Benefits Personally\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDisadvantage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e264 (57.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e198 (42.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.37 (1.03\u0026ndash;1.81)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBenefit\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e167 (49.4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e171 (50.6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003eSignificant associations in bold, *P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05, OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;odds ratio, CI\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;confidence interval\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eAssociation Between Age Groups, Political Orientation, and Perceived Need for Korean Reunification\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e shows the differences in perceptions of reunification necessity by age group and political orientations. The left-leaning group in their 40s and 50s exhibited the strongest perception of the necessity of reunification, which remained statistically significant after adjusting for all confounding variables (OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.07). Conversely, the right-leaning group in their 20s and 30s demonstrated a negative perception of reunification necessity, consistently considering it unnecessary even after adjusting for all confounding variables (OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.36). The left-leaning group in their 20s and 30s showed a tendency to support reunification; however, this association was not statistically significant after adjustment. Similarly, individuals in their 20s and 30s with no political affiliation displayed a negative perception of reunification necessity (OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.46).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAssociation Between Age Groups, Political Orientation, and Preference for a Unified Korean Healthcare System\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOdds Ratio (95% confidence interval)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20s30s, right (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;68)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.53 (0.30\u0026ndash;0.96)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.42 (0.22\u0026ndash;0.82)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.36 (0.18\u0026ndash;0.72)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40s50s, right (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;80)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.03 (0.61\u0026ndash;1.73)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.92 (0.54\u0026ndash;1.57)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.84 (0.48\u0026ndash;1.47)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20s30s, left (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;92)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.94 (1.18\u0026ndash;3.22)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.64 (0.92\u0026ndash;2.90)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.47 (0.80\u0026ndash;2.68)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40s50s, left (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;163)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e2.22 (1.45\u0026ndash;3.39)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e2.12 (1.38\u0026ndash;3.26)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e2.07 (1.33\u0026ndash;3.22)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20s30s, none (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;193)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.58 (0.39\u0026ndash;0.87)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.49 (0.29\u0026ndash;0.81)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.46 (0.27\u0026ndash;0.79)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40s50s, none (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;204)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003eSignificant associations in bold, Dependent variable: Need for unification.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003eModel 1 was a crude model\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003eModel 2 was adjusted for age, sex\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003eModel 3 was adjusted for age, sex, education, subjective social status, occupational status\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eAssociation Between Age Groups, Political Orientation, and Personal Benefits of Korean Reunification\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e presents the differences in perceptions of personal benefits from reunification across age groups and political orientations. The left-leaning group in their 20s and 30s, as well as those in their 40s and 50s, demonstrated a strong tendency to perceive reunification as personally beneficial. Notably, the left-leaning group in their 20s and 30s maintained a significant perception of personal benefits even after adjusting for all confounding variables (OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.60), while the left-leaning group in their 40s and 50s also showed statistically significant results (OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.97). In contrast, the right-leaning groups in both age categories (20s and 30s, 40s and 50s) reported relatively low perceptions of reunification as personally beneficial, with no statistically significant findings. Similarly, participants with no political affiliation did not exhibit a clear tendency to perceive reunification as personally beneficial. In contrast, the right-leaning groups in both age categories (20s and 30s, 40s and 50s) reported relatively low perceptions of reunification as personally beneficial, with no statistically significant findings. Similarly, participants with no political affiliation did not exhibit a clear tendency to perceive reunification as personally beneficial.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAssociation Between Age Groups, Political Orientation, and Personal Benefits of Korean Reunification\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOdds Ratio (95% confidence interval)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20s30s, right (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;68)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.51 (0.85\u0026ndash;2.67)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.64 (0.86\u0026ndash;3.13)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.45 (0.74\u0026ndash;2.84)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40s50s, right (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;80)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.37 (0.80\u0026ndash;2.36)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.23 (0.71\u0026ndash;2.13)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.96 (0.54\u0026ndash;1.71)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20s30s, left (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;92)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e4.10 (2.43\u0026ndash;6.89)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e4.71 (2.59\u0026ndash;8.54)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e4.60 (2.45\u0026ndash;8.63)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40s50s, left (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;163)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e3.12 (2.03\u0026ndash;4.80)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e2.93 (1.89\u0026ndash;4.54)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e2.97 (1.89\u0026ndash;4.67)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20s30s, none (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;193)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.19 (0.78\u0026ndash;1.81)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.39 (0.82\u0026ndash;2.34)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.33 (0.77\u0026ndash;2.30)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40s50s, none (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;204)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote:\u003c/em\u003e Significant associations in bold.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDependent variable: Personal belief that reunification is beneficial to oneself\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eModel 1 was a crude model\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eModel 2 was adjusted for age, sex\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eModel 3 was adjusted for age, sex, education, subjective social status, occupational status\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAssociation Between Age Groups, Political Orientation, and Preference for a Unified Korean Healthcare System\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e shows the differences in preferences for the healthcare system of a unified Korea based on age groups and political orientations. The right-leaning groups in both their 20s and 30s and those in their 40s and 50s showed a strong preference for maintaining South Korea's current healthcare system. Notably, the right-leaning group in their 20s and 30s demonstrated a significantly higher likelihood of preferring the current system even after adjusting for all confounding variables (OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.41), and a similar trend was observed among the right-leaning group in their 40s and 50s (OR\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.21). In contrast, the left-leaning groups in their 20s and 30s and those in their 40s and 50s did not show any significant differences in their preference for maintaining South Korea's current healthcare system. Additionally, individuals in their 20s and 30s with no political affiliation displayed a slight preference for maintaining the current system; however, this association was not statistically significant after adjusting for all confounding variables.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAssociation Between Age Groups, Political Orientation, and Preference for a Unified Korean Healthcare System\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOdds Ratio (95% confidence interval)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20s30s, right (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;68)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e2.35 (1.32\u0026ndash;4.19)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.89 (1.01\u0026ndash;3.57)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e2.41 (1.23\u0026ndash;4.70)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40s50s, right (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;80)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.98 (1.16\u0026ndash;3.37)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.95 (1.15\u0026ndash;3.33)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e2.21 (1.25\u0026ndash;3.91)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20s30s, left (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;92)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.03 (0.63\u0026ndash;1.69)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.84 (0.48\u0026ndash;1.47)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.01 (0.56\u0026ndash;1.84)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40s50s, left (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;163)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.14 (0.75\u0026ndash;1.72)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.13 (0.74\u0026ndash;1.70)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.15 (0.75\u0026ndash;1.78)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20s30s, none (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;193)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e1.56 (1.05\u0026ndash;2.31)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.21 (0.74\u0026ndash;1.97)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.65 (0.98\u0026ndash;2.79)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40s50s, none (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;204)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00 (Reference)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote:\u003c/em\u003e Significant associations in bold.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDependent variable: Preference for not changing the South Korean healthcare system.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eModel 1 was a crude model\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eModel 2 was adjusted for age, sex\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eModel 3 was adjusted for age, sex, education, subjective social status, occupational status\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study examined the influence of various factors associated with Korean reunification on preferences for South Korea's healthcare system and perceptions of reunification necessity. The findings indicate that ideological perceptions of reunification necessity are strongly associated with age groups, with older individuals consistently showing a stronger recognition of its importance, regardless of political orientation. Statistically, this trend reflects generational differences. As the proportion of younger generations grows and the older population declines, an overall decrease in the perception of reunification as necessary becomes evident.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrevious studies suggest that perceptions of reunification have gradually declined over time due to generational effects, a trend consistent with recent national surveys on reunification perceptions [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e]. Conversely, individuals in their 20s and 30s, regardless of political ideology, were more likely than those in their 40s and 50s to perceive reunification as personally beneficial. Notably, the 20s and 30s cohort share a relatively strong perception of North and South Korea as originally separate nations. Additionally, their political ideologies tend to lean toward conservatism. This aligns with recent political developments in North Korea, such as a directive by Kim Jong-un, the young leader of North Korea, in January 2024 to cease using the term \"unification,\" reflecting an internal shift toward viewing North and South Korea as distinct independent states. Recent surveys also indicate a growing negative perception of reunification necessity in South Korea. In one survey, 35.0% of respondents stated that reunification is unnecessary, the highest percentage recorded since the survey began in 2007 [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e]. This negative sentiment was particularly prominent among younger generations in their 20s and 30s. These attitudes can be attributed to rising hostility toward North Korea and an increasing distrust in inter-Korean relations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe finding that a pragmatic approach\u0026mdash;where unification is perceived as personally and socially beneficial or at least not harmful\u0026mdash;is supported across all age groups and political ideologies has significant implications. Specifically, phased economic measures and integrative policy designs are crucial to mitigating socioeconomic disparities and achieving stable system integration post-unification. Previous studies have emphasized that the economic costs of unification should not be viewed merely as a financial burden [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. Instead, they should be framed as a strategic foundation for strengthening social trust and cohesion, highlighting the need for complementary economic and social integration efforts [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e]. Furthermore, evidence from Eastern European countries demonstrates that improvements in health indicators cannot be achieved solely through the expansion of healthcare services [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e].This finding highlights the potential severity of health-related challenges in the North Korean region following unification[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e].Addressing these challenges will require simultaneous efforts to enhance healthcare systems and build social trust. Such measures should be implemented as integral components of broader political and social integration strategies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoreover, given that support for unification policies is shaped not only by economic benefits but also by citizens' political orientations and social beliefs, it is crucial to incorporate diverse values and preferences into post-unification policy design [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. This consideration is particularly significant for the establishment of a unified healthcare system. In conclusion, it is essential that discussions on unification move beyond ideological divisions and center on promoting economic and social pragmatism. which should serve as a foundational principle in the formulation of unification policies. These findings highlight that perceptions of the necessity of unification are not solely tied to attitudes toward unification itself but also reflect broader preferences for political and socioeconomic systems. This dynamic is equally relevant to the design of a unified healthcare system. Therefore, concerted policy efforts aimed at mitigating and reconciling ideological divisions are indispensable in the development of a healthcare system for a unified Korea.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStrengths and limitations\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study has several limitations. First, the sample was restricted to individuals aged 19 to 60, excluding those younger than 19 and older than 60, and thus does not capture the unique perspectives of all age groups. This exclusion should be carefully considered when interpreting the findings, as older adults, especially, may possess pivotal perspectives on reunification and the healthcare system. Second, as a survey-based study, the results are subject to potential biases, including respondents' subjective perceptions and social desirability bias. Participants may have provided responses that do not fully align with their true beliefs, especially regarding the sensitive topic of North-South Korean reunification. Finally, the cross-sectional design, which relied on data collected at a single point in time, limits the ability to examine temporal changes in perceptions or assess the impact of specific events. Addressing these gaps will require further longitudinal research to provide a more comprehensive understanding.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNevertheless, this study confirms that perceptions of Korean unification are shaped by a complex interplay of pragmatic and ideological factors, rather than being solely determined by individual attributes such as political ideology or age. Notably, while younger generations often perceive unification as unrealistic, their skepticism appears to stem more from negative perceptions of North Korea itself than from concerns about the socioeconomic burdens of unification, challenging common assumptions [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e]. Building on previous research suggesting that fostering empathy with North Korea and its residents, along with increasing exposure to North Korea-related experiences, can improve positive perceptions of unification, targeted efforts are required to enhance understanding and reduce biases [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e].In the context of designing a unified healthcare system and formulating related policies, integrative approaches and inclusive strategies are crucial for addressing generational and ideological differences in perceptions of unification.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo promote social integration after unification, it is crucial to develop effective strategies for utilizing North Korea's healthcare workforce at each stage of establishing a unified health insurance system, as highlighted in previous studies [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e]. Key strategies include establishing a central administrative body for health management, expanding inter-Korean exchanges, introducing a unified national licensing examination system, increasing enrollment capacities and establishing new educational institutions in the North, permitting private medical practices in the North, implementing a \u0026ldquo;dispersed medical workforce\u0026rdquo; system in the South, and expanding public healthcare personnel [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e]. These measures not only provide the foundation for a sustainable healthcare system in a unified Korea but also foster an inclusive environment where all social groups, particularly vulnerable populations, can access healthcare comprehensively.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study revealed that both age and political orientation significantly influence public preferences for a unified Korean healthcare system and perceptions of reunification. Right-leaning were more likely to prefer maintaining South Korea\u0026rsquo;s current healthcare system, while support for reunification was lower among younger right-leaning and non-affiliated individuals. In contrast, left-leaning individuals in their 40s and 50s expressed stronger support for reunification, and those in their 20s and 30s perceived the highest personal benefits. These findings suggest that future healthcare integration policies in a unified Korea must address generational and ideological divides. A tailored, inclusive approach will be essential to foster public consensus and ensure the long-term sustainability and equity of the healthcare system post-unification.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe Institutional Review Board (IRB) and Ethics Committee of Seoul National University School of Dentistry approved the study protocol (IRB No. S-D20230020), which was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants agreed to the study procedures and gave informed consent.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable (this manuscript does not report data generation or analysis)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests policy\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNo, I declare that the authors have no competing interests as defined by BMC, or other interests that might be perceived to influence the results and/or discussion reported in this paper.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research was financially supported by the Institute for Peace and Unification Studies at Seoul National University under the project titled “Laying the Groundwork for Unification and Peace\". And this research was also supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF) grant funded by the Korea government(ME) (No. 350-20240050)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor Contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConceptualization: Son JY, Park YY, Han DH. Data curation: Park YY, Han DH. Formal analysis: Son JY, Han DH. Funding acquisition: Han DH. Investigation: Park YY, Han DH. Methodology: Son JY, Han DH. Software: Son JY, Han DH. Validation: Son JY, Han DH. Visualization: Son JY. Writing - original draft: Son JY. Writing - review \u0026amp; editing: Son JY, Park YY, Han DH.\u003c/p\u003e\n"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChoi SK. The view of emergency medicine physician over the Korean Emergency Medical System: Problems and improvements. Public Health Aff. 2019;3(1):177-183.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYoon JH, Kwon IH, Park HW. The South Korean health-care system in crisis. Lancet. 2024 Jun 15;403(10444):2589.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLee TJ, Hwang I, Kim HL. Equity of health care financing in South Korea: 1990-2016. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Dec 11;21(1):1327.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKim MJ. Unintended consequences of healthcare reform in South Korea: Evidence from a regression discontinuity in time design. Health Res Policy Syst. 2023 Jun 22;21(1):60.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYeo JY, Kim HR. Assessment of Korea health care system performance during 2000-2010. Korean J Health Econ Policy. 2014;20(4):123-144.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCho JY, Jeong HS. The effect of population ageing on healthcare expenditure in Korea: From the perspective of \u0026lsquo;healthy ageing\u0026rsquo; using age-period-cohort analysis. Health Policy Manag. 2018;28(4):378-391.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYoon HJ, Woo SH, Kim D, Um JH, Park SH, Seo AR. Changes in medical research trends of North Korea after economic sanctions: A PRISMA-compliant systematic literature review of North Korean medical journals. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Jul;98(29):e16500.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLee MJ, Kim HN, Cho DB, et al. Overview of healthcare system in North Korea. J Korean Med Assoc. 2013;56:358-567.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMun IC. Seoul-Pyongyang health and medical cooperation study. Seoul: The Seoul Institute; 2021.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYoon MJ. The study of ideological conflict and its characteristic in Korea. J Humanit Soc Sci. 2017;8(5):831-850.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLee MY. Korean younger generation\u0026apos;s perception of China and Japan: Focusing on the fact-checking of Korean media reports. J Peace Unif Stud. 2023;15(1):289-319. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKim HN, Park WH. Perceptions of unification, North Korea, and acceptance of North Korean refugees among the young generation. Korean Polit Sci Rev. 2023;57(4):59-89.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSong S, Lee JM. The analysis of perception of perennial countries on the Korean Peninsula by generation: A study on the possibility of overlap between South-South conflict and generation conflict. Soc Sci Res Int. 2019;43(1):117-141.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGerbaudo P. Angry posts mobilize: Emotional communication and online mobilization in the Facebook pages of Western European right-wing populist leaders. Social Media Stud. 2023;9(9):1-18.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHarris and Trump embrace tariffs, though their approaches differ. New York Times. 2024 Aug 27.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKim TH, Kang HW. A study on South Koreans\u0026rsquo; response to the U.S. presidential election and changes in trade policy. J CEO Manag Stud. 2024;27(4):223-241.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKwon Y, Lee KS. Revisiting inter-Korean events and South Koreans\u0026rsquo; perception of unification. Soc Sci Q. 2024;1-17.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe Institute for Peace and Unification Studies, Seoul National University. Unification perception survey report. Siheung-si, Gyeonggi-do: Institute for Peace and Unification Studies; 2024. Available from: https://ipus.snu.ac.kr/data-archive\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe Institute for Peace and Unification Studies, Seoul National University. Unification perception survey. 2024. Available from: https://ipus.snu.ac.kr/blog/archives/research_cat/unification_perception-survey\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThe Institute for Peace and Unification Studies, Seoul National University. Unification perception survey. 2007. Available from: https://ipus.snu.ac.kr/blog/archives/research_cat/unification_perception-survey\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHong KS, Lee KH, Park SH. Economic challenges and solutions in the process of unification on the Korean Peninsula. Int Promot Agency Cult Technol. 2024;10(4):437-442.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJoo YJ, Heo SE, Lee JE. The implications on the healthcare system of unified Korea: Lessons from system integration countries. Health Policy Manag. 2020;30(3):301-310.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLee HY, Choi HS, Kwon YM, Park JH. Social beliefs, attitudes toward unification, and support for unification policies. Korean J Soc Personal Psychol. 2021;35(4):27-47.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKo KY, Kim TB. Hope and skepticism: Analysis of Z-generation\u0026rsquo;s unification skepticism. Natl Strategy. 2024;30(4):217-247.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKim NY. Relationship between contact with North Korea and North Korean settlers and perceptions of unification: Mediator effect of intimacy and perception. J Korea Content Assoc. 2021;21(8):489-497.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJeong HS, Shin HW, Lee KS, Lee GS. Designing health insurance systems for unified Korea. Health Insur Policy. 2014;13(2):9-21.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Health Care Reform, Reunification, Unified Korea, Intergenerational Relations, Social Values","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6337867/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6337867/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003ch2\u003eBackground/Objectives:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the context of potential Korean unification, integrating South Korea\u0026rsquo;s robust but strained healthcare system with North Korea\u0026rsquo;s resource-deficient framework presents significant challenges. This study explores public preferences for a unified healthcare system, focusing on generational and ideological factors.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eMethods\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA total of 800 adults aged 19\u0026ndash;59 were recruited using proportional quota sampling. Preferences for a unified healthcare system, perceptions of unification necessity, and expected personal benefits were analyzed using logistic regression, adjusting for age, gender, education level, subjective social status, and political ideology.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eResults\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study examines age and political orientation in relation to healthcare preferences and perceptions of Korean reunification. Right-wing individuals in their 20s and 30s (OR: 2.41) and 40s and 50s (OR: 2.21) are more likely to favor maintaining the current healthcare system compared to non-political individuals in their 40s and 50s. Support for reunification is lower among 20s and 30s, especially right-wing (OR: 0.36) and non-political (OR: 0.46) groups, while left-wing individuals in their 40s and 50s (OR: 2.07) show stronger support. Perceived personal benefits from reunification are highest among left-wing individuals in their 20s and 30s (OR: 4.60) and 40s and 50s (OR: 2.97). These findings highlight the influence of demographic and political factors on key social attitudes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConclusions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003ePublic preferences for a unified healthcare system are influenced by both pragmatic and ideological considerations. To ensure sustainable integration, healthcare policies must address generational and political divides while prioritizing equitable access and social cohesion in a unified Korea.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Public Preferences for a Unified Healthcare System in Korea: Generational and Ideological Insights","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-04-24 11:30:19","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6337867/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"cae43ec4-0e83-4ee3-ac81-345fb99d4947","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 24th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-07-25T12:53:57+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-04-24 11:30:19","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6337867","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6337867","identity":"rs-6337867","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}