Danish Financing
Denmark follows this healthcare model, meaning 100% of the population receives public coverage.
Answer: The Beveridge model
Unlike Denmark, the US uses this type of model where public coverage is limited to specific populations.
Answer: A mixed or residual healthcare model
In 2005, Denmark introduced this pricing model, setting drug prices based on the minimum price within a product group.
Answer: A reference pricing model
In Denmark, this nonprofit organization provides revenue for almost all private complementary health insurance.
(Hint: It sounds a lot like Denmark...)
Answer: Danmark
As of 2021, Denmark's per-capita health expenditure was this amount in USD
A. $800-$1,500
B. $2,000-$5,000
C. $6,000-$8,000
D. $10,000-$12,000
Answer: C
~$6,745 USD per capita
This percentage of Denmark's public insurance revenue comes from progressive national income tax.
(Guesses within 10% will be counted)
Answer: 77%
The ACA's individual mandate penalty was repealed in this year, making it legal to be uninsured in most states.
Answer: 2019
The Kaiser et al. 2010 study focused on this drug category — the most-sold drug in Denmark — to analyze the effects of the 2005 pricing reform.
Answer: Statins (cholesterol-reducing drugs)
This company plays a core role in funding patient organizations in Denmark, sometimes serving as a sole sponsor.
(Hint: It sounds like one of our names)
Answer: AbbVie
In 2022, the US spent this amount per capita on healthcare — the highest globally.
A. $5,000-$6,000
B. $8,000-$10,000
C. $12,000-$15,000
D. $16,000-$18,000
Answer: C. $12,000-$15,000
~ $12,586 per capita
42% of Denmark's population uses this type of private coverage on top of their public insurance.
Answer: Private complementary coverage (voluntary individual plans)
This 2010 law was the most significant US effort at expanding coverage, introducing subsidies, Medicaid expansion, and an individual mandate.
Answer: The Affordable Care Act (ACA)
💊 The generic version of this question is available — but somehow costs more.
In the US, this is the starting price manufacturers set for drugs, before rebates and discounts bring it to a lower 'net price.'
Answer: The list price
In Denmark, pharmaceutical companies influence healthcare policy indirectly by funding these groups, which participate in policy debates.
Answer: Patient advocacy / civil society organizations
The paper states US pharmaceutical spending per capita was $1,376 (PPP) — this many times the high-income country average of $571.
(Clarification: Answer in a factor i.e. double, triple, quadruple, etc)
Answer: More than double (2x)
Denmark's 2007 structural reform reorganized healthcare by replacing 14 counties with this many larger regions.
(Hint: We had this many groups for our debate last Thursday)
Answer: Five (5) regions
The paper argues this is one reason the US never achieved national health insurance — a concept tied to the country's historical and political development.
Answer: America's strong culture of individualism (and historical political/economic factors)
These two practices allow US drug manufacturers to extend their market monopolies and delay the entry of generics and biosimilars.
Answer: Patent thickening and price evergreening
These private actors contribute to the ACA reform process in the U.S.
Answer: Lobbying, campaign financing, and negotiations over regulatory frameworks
Pharmaceuticals accounted for approximately this percentage of total US healthcare expenditure in 2022.
Answer: 12%
Under Denmark's system, GPs function as these — meaning patients must see them before accessing hospital or specialist care.
Answer: Gatekeepers between primary and specialized care
The AMA teamed up with this PR firm — the country's first — to run a campaign framing national health insurance as 'socialism.'
Answer: Whitaker and Baxter
These factors lead to regressivity in the US pharmaceutical pricing system.
Answer: Unregulated and market-based
A 2025 study cited in the paper found that both the US and Danish pharmaceutical systems score negatively on this metric, placing a higher burden on low-income individuals.
Answer: Progressivity (both systems are regressive)
In 2023, out-of-pocket pharmaceutical spending was 13.8% of Denmark's OOP expenditure — compared to this lower figure in the US.
Answer: 10.9%