Public perceptions of the importance of prognosis in allocating transplantable livers to children

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 16, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 234-241

  Ubel, Peter A ^a,b   Loewenstein, George ^c  

^a VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^c CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

equity; ethics; health policy; prognosis; transplantation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LIVER TRANSPLANTATION; MALE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PERCEPTION; PROGNOSIS; RESOURCE ALLOCATION;

CLINICAL APPROACH/SOURCE; EMPIRICAL APPROACH; HEALTH CARE AND PUBLIC HEALTH; JUSTICE; PENNSYLVANIA; PROFESSIONAL PATIENT RELATIONSHIP; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SELECTION FOR TREATMENT; SURVEY; UNITED STATES; VALUES;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CHILD; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE RATIONING; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; LIVER TRANSPLANTATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SELECTION; PENNSYLVANIA; PROGNOSIS; QUESTIONNAIRES; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SOCIAL VALUES; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 0029948367     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9601600307     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Starzl ET, Shapiro K, Teperman L. The point system for organ distribution. Transplant Proc. 1989;21:3432-6.
2. Wilder D. Equity, efficacy, and the point system for transplant recipient selection. Transplant Proc. 1989;21:3437-9.
3. United Network for Organ Sharing. Articles of incorporation. June 27, 1995
4. Annas GJ. The prostitute, the playboy, and the poet: rationing schemes for organ transplantation. Am J Public Health. 1985; 75:187-9.
5. Caplan AL. Problems in the policies and criteria used to allocate organs for transplantation in the United States. Transplant Proc. 1989;21:3381-7.
6. Kilner JF. Who lives? Who dies? Ethical criteria in patient selection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1990.
7. Bronsther O, Fund JJ, Isakis A, Van Thiel D, Starzl T. Prioritization of organ distribution for liver transplantation. JAMA. 1994;2721:140-3.
8. Ubel PA, Arnold RM, Caplan AL. Rationing failure: the ethical lessons of the retransplantation of scarce, vital organs. JAMA. 1993;270:2469-74.
9. Hadorn DC. The role of public values in setting health care priorities. Soc Sci Med. 1991;32:773-81.
10. Garland MJ. Justice, politics and community: expanding access and rationing health services in Oregon. Law Med Health Care. 1992;20:67-81.
11. Ubel PA, Loewenstein G. The efficacy and equity of retransplantation: an experimental survey of public attitudes. Health Policy. 1995;34:145-51, 1996.
12. Nord E. The trade-off between severity of illness and treatment effect in cost-value analysis of health care Health Policy. 1993;24:227-38.
13. Nord E The relevance of health state after treatment in prioritizing between different patients. J Med Ethics. 1993;19: 37-42.
14. Ubel PA, Scanlon D, Loewenstein G, Kamlet M. Individual utilities are inconsistent with rationing choices: a partial explanation of why Oregon's cost-effectiveness list failed. Med Decis Making. 1996;16:108-16.
15. Kahneman D, Varey C. Notes on the psychology of utility. In: Elster J, Roemer JE (eds). Interpersonal Comparisons of Well-being. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
16. Yaari ME, Bar-Hillel M. On dividing justly. Social Choice and Welfare. 1984;1:1-24.
17. Mill JS. Utilitarianism. In: The Utilitarians. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books, 1973.
18. Rawls J. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971.
19. Skitka LJ, Tetlock PE. Allocating scarce resources: a contingency model of distributive justice. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1992; 28:491-522
20. Gal I, Baron J. Understanding repeated gambles. Cognition and Instruction. In press, 1996.
21. Redelmeier DA, Tversky A. Discrepancy between medical decisions for individual patients and for groups. N Engl J Med. 1990;322:1162-4.
22. Fischhoff B. Value elicitation: is there anything in there? Am Psychologist 1991;46:835-47.
23. Alexander S. They decide who lives, who dies. Life. 1962; Nov 9:100-6.
24. Caplan AL Equity in the selection of recipients for cardiac transplants. Circulation. 1987;75:10-9