This empirical study tests whether transplant center performance data that reflect center donor acceptance rates influence patients and their family members to evaluate centers with high organ decline rates less favorably than centers with low organ decline rates. 400 transplant patients and family members will be recruited from transplant support group social media websites and randomized to one of four different information presentation conditions. Upon viewing a pair of outcome tables corresponding to their condition, the participants are asked to choose which hospital is higher performing (one hospital with a non-selective "accepting" strategy and one hospital with a more selective "cherrypicking" strategy.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
SINGLE
Enrollment
94
Both transplant metric conditions display the number of hearts offered to each center, the number of hearts accepted by each center, and the number of transplants performed at each center (in a year), in addition to the condition-specific metrics below. The stratified condition instead features a pair of values corresponding to each center's offers/acceptances/transplant survival rates for donor hearts of "optimal" or "adequate" quality.
The information format varies based on how the transplant hospital statistics are organized when presented to participants on the choice screen. The SRTR conditions mimic the information format present on the SRTR public reporting website.
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
Hospital Choice
The outcome variable will be a measure of binary choice between two hospitals: one with a selective donor-heart acceptance strategy and one with a non-selective donor heart acceptance strategy. Participants will respond to the question "Which Hospital is higher performing? Please click on one of the two tables below to indicate which hospital is the better choice." Participants will choose been two outcome tables featuring the selective and non-selective hospital (counterbalanced, such that each of the two choices is equally likely to be presented at top of the choice scenario in each condition). The number of participants that choose each hospital will be the measured outcome variable used in analyses.
Time frame: 1 day
Mediator of Hospital Choice
On the next page of the survey, participants will respond to three mediator questions: "There are many reasons why one transplant hospital might outperform another. Which reasons were most important in your decision? Please move the slider to indicate how much you considered each of the reasons below (0=reason was not important, 100=reason was extremely important)." Participants will then move a slider bar (0-100) to indicate the importance of the following three items: Patients were more likely to receive an excellent donor heart at the hospital I picked. Patients were less likely to receive a marginal donor heart at the hospital I picked. Patients were more likely to receive any kind of heart at the hospital I picked. The third item (more likely to receive any kind of heart) will be the only variable that is included in the planned mediation analysis.
Time frame: 1 day
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.