Setting Organ Allocation Priorities: A Discrete Choice Experiment with German Patients and Their Relatives

References

• Bezinover D, Saner F. Organ transplantation in the modern era. BMC Anesthesiol. 2019;19:32. doi:10.1186/s12871-019-0704-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calne RY. Organ transplantation has come of age. Sci Prog. 2010;93(2):141–150. doi:10.3184/003685010X12708274571283
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Persad G, Wertheimer A, Emanuel EJ. Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions. Lancet. 2009;373(9661):423–431. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60137-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaubel DE, Guidinger MK, Biggins SW, et al. Survival benefit-based deceased-donor liver allocation. Am J Transplant. 2009;9(4 Pt 2):970–981. doi:10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02571.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartling T, Oedingen C, Kohlmann T, Schrem H, Krauth C. Comparing preferences of physicians and patients regarding the allocation of donor organs: a systematic review. Transplant Rev. 2020;34(1):100515. doi:10.1016/j.trre.2019.100515
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark MD, Gumber AK, Leech D, et al. Prioritising patients for renal transplantation? Analysis of patient preferences for kidney allocation according to ethnicity and gender. Diversity Health Care. 2009;6:181–191.
   Google Scholar
• Bekker-Grob EW, Ryan M, Gerard K. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Health Econ. 2012;21(2):145–172. doi:10.1002/hec.1697
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark MD, Determann D, Petrou S, Moro D. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32(9):883–902. doi:10.1007/s40273-014-0170-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartling T, Oedingen C, Kohlmann T, Schrem H, Krauth C. How Should Deceased Donor Organs Be Allocated? The Patient’s Perspective Derived from Semi-Structured Interviews. PPA. 2022;16:2375–2385. doi:10.2147/PPA.S372603
   Google Scholar
• Reed Johnson F, Lancsar E, Marshall D, et al. Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Experimental Design Good Research Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2013;16(1):3–13. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.2223
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oedingen C, Bartling T, Krauth C. Public, medical professionals and patients preferences for the allocation of donor organs for transplantation: study protocol for discrete choice experiments. BMJ Open. 2018;8:e026040. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026040
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oedingen C, Bartling T, Schrem H, Mühlbacher AC, Krauth C. Public preferences for the allocation of donor organs for transplantation: a discrete choice experiment. Soc Sci Med. 2021;287:114360. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114360
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oedingen C, Bartling T, Dierks M-L, Mühlbacher AC, Schrem H, Krauth C. Public preferences for the allocation of donor organs for transplantation: focus group discussions. Health Expect. 2020;23:670–680. doi:10.1111/hex.13047
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunst RF, Mason RL. Fractional factorial design. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Comput Stat. 2009;1(2):234–244. doi:10.1002/wics.27
   Google Scholar
• Johnson R, Orme B. Getting the Most from CBC: sawtooth Software Research Paper Series. 2003 Available from: https://sawtoothsoftware.com/resources/technical-papers/getting-the-most-from-cbc Accessed 21 March 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Orme B. Sample Size Issues for Conjoint Analysis Studies: sawtooth Software Technical Paper. 1998 Available from: https://sawtoothsoftware.com/resources/technical-papers/sample-size-issues-for-conjoint-analysis-studies (updated version from 2019) Accessed 21 March 2023.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhfeld WF Experimental Design: efficiency, Coding, and Choice Designs: SAS Technical Papers MR-2010C. Available from: http://support.sas.com/techsup/technote/mr2010c.pdf. Accessed November 3, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Gensch DH, Recker WW, Multinomial T. Multiattribute Logit Choice Model. J Marketing Res. 1979;16(1):124. doi:10.2307/3150883
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McFadden D. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In: Zarembka P, editor. Frontiers in Econometrics. Academic Press; 1974:104–143.
   Google Scholar
• Hauber AB, González JM, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CGM, et al. Statistical Methods for the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments: a Report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2016;19(4):300–315. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ladin K, Emerson J, Butt Z, et al. How important is social support in determining patients’ suitability for transplantation? Results from a National Survey of Transplant Clinicians. J Med Ethics. 2018;44(10):666–674. doi:10.1136/medethics-2017-104695
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eurotransplant. Transplants (deceased donor) in Germany, by year, by characteristics. Available from: https://statistics.eurotransplant.org/index.php?search_type=transplants&search_organ=&search_region=Germany&search_period=2021&search_characteristic=recipient+age&search_text=&search_collection=. Accessed August 23, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Geddes CC, Rodger RSC, Smith C, Ganai A. Allocation of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation: opinions of patients with CKD. Am J Kidney Dis. 2005;46(5):949–956. doi:10.1053/j.ajkd.2005.07.031
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Umgelter KS, Tobiasch M, Anetsberger A, Blobner M, Thorban S, Umgelter A. Donor organ distribution according to urgency of need or outcome maximization in liver transplantation. A questionnaire survey among patients and medical staff. Transpl Int. 2015;28(4):448–454. doi:10.1111/tri.12512
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartling T, Oedingen C, Schrem H, Kohlmann T, Krauth C. ‘As a surgeon, I am obliged to every single patient’: evaluation of focus group discussions with transplantation physicians on the allocation of donor organs. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2021;26(5):459–467. doi:10.1097/MOT.000000000000090
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar