Computerized data

Responses to “Medical data must graduate from the cave,” @issue, Jan. 30.

What trauma care numbers said

In a recent column “Environmental virtue, trauma care, emissions” (@issue, Jan. 30), Jim Wooten snubs his nose at our finding that 69 percent of Georgians are willing to pay $25 or more per year for improved trauma care and suggests that we should have framed our question as follows: “How much in higher taxes are you personally willing to pay to provide …?”

While our actual question didn’t refer specifically to taxes, the preceding question did. Poll respondents were asked whether they favored “creating and maintaining a trauma system supported by public funds, whether taxes, fees or fines of some sort?” Some 75.6 percent responded yes. Then we asked: “How much would you be willing to pay per year to have a trauma system in Georgia ready to provide care 24 hours a day, seven days a week, if you or your family were seriously injured?”

The respondents were then asked to select one of six options. Those results: Nothing —- 7 percent; $1 —- 4 percent; $5 —- 9.4 percent; $10 —- 10.6 percent; $25 —- 27.4 percent; more than $25 —- 41.6 percent. We polled 397 registered Georgia voters from throughout the state; half were in South Georgia, where our findings on support for public funding and personal willingness to pay were in line with —- and in some cases higher than —- other parts of the state.

JAMES J. BASON

Bason is director of the Survey Research Center at the University of Georgia.

Read this editorial by James J. Bason, Stephen Smith, Brad Beebe, Elizabeth Hartley Filliat, Rebecca Wright, John G. Rice, Hosanna M. Johnson, Jolinda Collins from the Feb. 9, 2009 Atlanta Journal-Constitution.