Literature DB >> 10721015

Public preferences for the allocation of donor liver grafts for transplantation.

J Ratcliffe1.   

Abstract

To investigate the nature of public preferences in the allocation of donor liver grafts for transplantation a social conjoint analysis (CA) technique was developed for a questionnaire survey. A convenience sample of academic and non-academic employees of a British University were invited to participate in the survey. Respondents were presented with eight choice situations in which they were asked to allocate 100 donor liver grafts between two groups of 100 individuals in urgent need of a transplant. The groups of individuals differed in terms of the length of time spent waiting, the life years gained following transplantation, age, personal responsibility for their illness and whether they were primary or re-transplant candidates. Only two respondents (0.7%) consistently chose to give all of the donor organs to the group of individuals with the highest expected length of survival whilst seven respondents (2%) exhibited strict egalitarian preferences, allocating equal numbers of donor organs to both groups irrespective of their characteristics. The vast majority of respondents indicated that they would be prepared to sacrifice some gain in the efficiency of the transplantation programme for an increase in equity or fairness in the allocation of donor livers. Using social CA it was possible to establish the relative weight attached to each characteristic in determining individual's allocation decisions. Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Health Care and Public Health

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10721015     DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1050(200003)9:2<137::aid-hec489>3.0.co;2-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Econ        ISSN: 1057-9230            Impact factor:   3.046


  37 in total

Review 1.  Measuring patients' preferences for treatment and perceptions of risk.

Authors:  A Bowling; S Ebrahim
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2001-09

Review 2.  Resource allocation, social values and the QALY: a review of the debate and empirical evidence.

Authors:  David L B Schwappach
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 3.  Willingness to pay for a QALY: theoretical and methodological issues.

Authors:  Dorte Gyrd-Hansen
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Futility and rationing in liver retransplantation: when and how can we say no?

Authors:  Scott W Biggins
Journal:  J Hepatol       Date:  2012-02-04       Impact factor: 25.083

5.  Choosing vs. allocating: discrete choice experiments and constant-sum paired comparisons for the elicitation of societal preferences.

Authors:  Chris D Skedgel; Allan J Wailoo; Ron L Akehurst
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 6.  Developing a framework for evaluating kidney transplantation candidacy in children with multiple comorbidities.

Authors:  Aviva M Goldberg; Sandra Amaral; Asha Moudgil
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2014-01-23       Impact factor: 3.714

7.  Constant-sum paired comparisons for eliciting stated preferences: a tutorial.

Authors:  Chris Skedgel; Dean A Regier
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 3.883

8.  Harnessing the potential to quantify public preferences for healthcare priorities through citizens' juries.

Authors:  Jennifer A Whitty; Paul Burton; Elizabeth Kendall; Julie Ratcliffe; Andrew Wilson; Peter Littlejohns; Paul A Scuffham
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2014-06-16

9.  How do people value life?

Authors:  Meng Li; Jeffrey Vietri; Alison P Galvani; Gretchen B Chapman
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2009-12-22

10.  Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: a user's guide.

Authors:  Emily Lancsar; Jordan Louviere
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.