↓ Skip to main content

Preferences for Policy Options for Deceased Organ Donation for Transplantation

Overview of attention for article published in Transplantation, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Preferences for Policy Options for Deceased Organ Donation for Transplantation
Published in
Transplantation, May 2016
DOI 10.1097/tp.0000000000000940
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kirsten Howard, Stephen Jan, John M. Rose, Germaine Wong, Jonathan C. Craig, Michelle Irving, Allison Tong, Steven Chadban, Richard D. Allen, Alan Cass

Abstract

Despite broad public support for organ donation, there is a chronic shortage of deceased donor organs. We sought to identify community preferences for features of organ donation policies. A discrete choice study was conducted using an online panel of Australian community respondents older than 18 years. Respondents were presented with scenarios comparing a "new" policy to the current policy. Tradeoffs between 8 policy aspects were quantified using mixed logit and latent class models: registration system, extent of donor family involvement, ease of registration, frequency of confirmation of intent, direct payment, and funeral expense reimbursement, priority for donor's family, and formal recognition of donation. There were 2005 respondents (mean, 44.6 years). We found a strong preference for a new policy. Overall, respondents favored a policy that included: some involvement of the donor's family in the final decision, simple registration processes, less frequent reconfirmation of donation intent, direct payment or funeral expense reimbursement, and formal recognition of donation. However, there was significant preference heterogeneity across respondents, with various respondent groups valuing policy mechanisms differently. Respondents who viewed policy change negatively were also those who would be unlikely to be organ donors anyway, because they tended to hold negative views toward organ donation. Our results suggest that the Australian community are open to alternative organ donation policies including changes to: registration systems, family involvement, and financial and nonfinancial mechanisms. Future policy discussions should not be limited by preconceived notions of what is acceptable to the community, rather informed by actual community values and preferences.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Argentina 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 41 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 26%
Student > Master 6 14%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 5%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 12 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 16%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 12%
Social Sciences 5 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 12%
Arts and Humanities 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 13 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 April 2016.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Transplantation
#7,268
of 7,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,271
of 311,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Transplantation
#66
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,576 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,866 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.