Literature DB >> 26350932

Does Social Capital Explain Community-Level Differences in Organ Donor Designation?

Keren Ladin1,2, Rui Wang3, Aaron Fleishman4, Matthew Boger5, James R Rodrigue3,4.   

Abstract

POLICY POINTS: The growing shortage of life-saving organs has reached unprecedented levels, with more than 120,000 Americans waiting for them. Despite national attempts to increase organ donation and federal laws mandating the equitable allocation of organs, geographic disparities remain. A better understanding of the contextual determinants of organ donor designation, including social capital, may enhance efforts to increase organ donation by raising the probability of collective action and fostering norms of reciprocity and cooperation while increasing costs to defectors. Because community-level factors, including social capital, predict more than half the variation in donor designation, future interventions should tailor strategies to specific communities as the unit of intervention. CONTEXT: The growing shortage of organs has reached unprecedented levels. Despite national attempts to increase donation and federal laws mandating the equitable allocation of organs, their availability and waiting times vary significantly nationwide. Organ donor designation is a collective action problem in public health, in which the regional organ supply and average waiting times are determined by the willingness of individuals to be listed as organ donors. Social capital increases the probability of collective action by fostering norms of reciprocity and cooperation while increasing costs to defectors. We examine whether social capital and other community-level factors explain geographic variation in organ donor designation rates in Massachusetts.
METHODS: We obtained a sample of 3,281,532 registered drivers in 2010 from the Massachusetts Department of Transportation Registry of Motor Vehicles (MassDOT RMV). We then geocoded the registry data, matched them to 4,466 census blocks, and linked them to the 2010 US Census, the American Community Survey (ACS), and other sources to obtain community-level sociodemographic, social capital (residential segregation, voter registration and participation, residential mobility, violent-death rate), and religious characteristics. We used spatial modeling, including lagged variables to account for the effect of adjacent block groups, and multivariate regression analysis to examine the relationship of social capital and community-level characteristics with organ donor designation rates.
FINDINGS: Block groups with higher levels of social capital, racial homogeneity, income, workforce participation, owner-occupied housing, native-born residents, and white residents had higher rates of organ donor designation (p < 0.001). These factors remained significant in the multivariate model, which explained more than half the geographic variance in organ donor designation (R(2) = 0.52).
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that community-level factors, including social capital, predict more than half the variation in donor designation. Future interventions should target the community as the unit of intervention and should tailor messaging for areas with low social capital.
© 2015 Milbank Memorial Fund.

Entities:  

Keywords:  geographic variation; organ donation; social capital; spatial statistics

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26350932      PMCID: PMC4567855          DOI: 10.1111/1468-0009.12139

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Milbank Q        ISSN: 0887-378X            Impact factor:   4.911


  47 in total

1.  Driving donation: a geographic analysis of potential organ donors in the state of Ohio, USA.

Authors:  T H Grubesic
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 4.634

2.  Influence of religious and spiritual values on the willingness of Chinese-Americans to donate organs for transplantation.

Authors:  W A Lam; L B McCullough
Journal:  Clin Transplant       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.863

3.  Mapping and measuring social disparities in premature mortality: the impact of census tract poverty within and across Boston neighborhoods, 1999-2001.

Authors:  Jarvis T Chen; David H Rehkopf; Pamela D Waterman; S V Subramanian; Brent A Coull; Bruce Cohen; Mary Ostrem; Nancy Krieger
Journal:  J Urban Health       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.671

4.  Community volunteerism and blood donation: altruism as a lifestyle choice.

Authors:  Megan Alessandrini
Journal:  Transfus Med Rev       Date:  2007-10

Review 5.  Factors influencing organ donation decisions by African Americans: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Richard S Kurz; Darcell P Scharff; Tanchica Terry; Shanica Alexander; Amy Waterman
Journal:  Med Care Res Rev       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 3.929

6.  Understanding disparities in donor behavior: race and gender differences in willingness to donate blood and cadaveric organs.

Authors:  L Ebony Boulware; Lloyd E Ratner; Lisa A Cooper; Julie Ann Sosa; Thomas A LaVeist; Neil R Powe
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  Multiple listings as a reflection of geographic disparity in liver transplantation.

Authors:  Parsia A Vagefi; Sandy Feng; Jennifer L Dodge; James F Markmann; John P Roberts
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2014-05-02       Impact factor: 6.113

8.  Barriers to obtaining family consent for potential organ donors.

Authors:  Carlos V R Brown; Kelli H Foulkrod; Sarah Dworaczyk; Kit Thompson; Eric Elliot; Hassie Cooper; Ben Coopwood
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2010-02

9.  Attitudes to kidney donation and registering as a donor among ethnic groups in the UK.

Authors:  Myfanwy Morgan; Richard Hooper; Maya Mayblin; Roger Jones
Journal:  J Public Health (Oxf)       Date:  2006-07-14       Impact factor: 2.341

10.  Ethnicity and registration as a kidney donor: the significance of identity and belonging.

Authors:  Myfanwy Morgan; Maya Mayblin; Roger Jones
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2007-10-01       Impact factor: 4.634

View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Are geographic differences in transplantation inherently wrong?

Authors:  Keren Ladin; Douglas W Hanto
Journal:  Curr Opin Organ Transplant       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 2.640

2.  Registration for deceased organ and tissue donation among Ontario immigrants: a population-based cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Alvin Ho-Ting Li; Ngan N Lam; Sonny Dhanani; Matthew Weir; Versha Prakash; Joseph Kim; Greg Knoll; Amit X Garg
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2016-10-11

3.  Concordance of Organ Donation and Other Altruistic Behaviors Among Twins.

Authors:  Anne M Huml; J Daryl Thornton; Maria Figueroa; Katrice Cain; Jacqueline Dolata; Karen Scott; Catherine Sullivan; Ashwini R Sehgal
Journal:  Prog Transplant       Date:  2019-05-30       Impact factor: 1.187

4.  Is Prosocial Behavior Associated With Increased Registration for Deceased Organ Donation? A Cross-sectional Study of Ontario, Canada.

Authors:  Piotr Wilk; Lucie Richard; Alexandra M Ouédraogo; Amit X Garg; Alana Maltby; Salimah Z Shariff
Journal:  Transplant Direct       Date:  2020-11-10

5.  Predictors of Deceased Organ Donation in the Pediatric Population.

Authors:  Justin Godown; Alison Butler; Daniel J Lebovitz; Gretchen Chapman
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2021-05-07       Impact factor: 9.703

6.  Relationship Between High Organ Donation Rates and COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage.

Authors:  Yusuke Inoue
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2022-04-11

7.  Neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation, racial segregation, and organ donation across 5 states.

Authors:  Sharad I Wadhwani; Cole Brokamp; Erika Rasnick; John C Bucuvalas; Jennifer C Lai; Andrew F Beck
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2020-08-04       Impact factor: 8.086

8.  Evaluating Spatial Associations in Inpatient Deaths Between Organ Procurement Organizations.

Authors:  Joel T Adler; Tanujit Dey
Journal:  Transplant Direct       Date:  2021-02-11
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.