ArticleThe patient2021
Public Preferences for Allocating Ventilators in an Intensive Care Unit: A Discrete Choice Experiment.
Article in The patient, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Promotion of Knowledge and Trust Surrounding Scarce Resource Allocation Policies: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA health forum · 2024Trial
- Patient preferences for Remote cochlear implant management: A discrete choice experiment.PloS one · 2025Article
- From a Single Voice to Diversity: Reframing 'Representation' in Patient Engagement.Qualitative health research · 2024Article
- Health Professional vs Layperson Values and Preferences on Scarce Resource Allocation.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Explicit discrimination and ingroup favoritism, but no implicit biases in hypothetical triage decisions during COVID-19.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Public perspectives on COVID-19 triage protocols for access to critical care in extreme pandemic context.PloS one · 2024Article
- Patients' rights in physicians' practice during Covid-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study in Romania.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Prioritization of surgical patients during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond: A qualitative exploration of patients' perspectives.PloS one · 2023Article
- Public voices on tie-breaking criteria and underlying values in COVID-19 triage protocols to access critical care: a scoping review.Discover health systems · 2023Article
- Community preferences for the allocation of scarce healthcare resources during the COVID-19 pandemic: a review of the literature.Public health · 2022Review
- Which features of patients are morally relevant in ventilator triage? A survey of the UK public.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Using Societal Values to Inform Public Health Policy During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Role of Health Preference Research.The patient · 2021Article
- Priorities Towards Fair Allocation of Ventilators During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Delphi Study.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, resources in intensive care units (ICUs) have the potential to be inadequate to treat all those who might benefit. Therefore, it is paramount to identify the views of the community regarding how to allocate such resources. This study aims to quantify Australian community preferences for ventilation allocation.
methodsA discrete choice experiment was designed and administrated to an adult Australian online panel. Each survey respondent answered 12 choice sets from a total design of 120. Each choice set placed the respondent in the role of hypothetical decision maker, prioritising care between two patients. Conditional logit, mixed logit regression and latent class analysis were used to analyse the data. Additionally, we asked a series of attitudinal questions about different methods of making such decisions in practice, focusing on who should be responsible.
resultsA total of 1050 community members completed the survey and responded to each choice. Dimensions considered most important were age, likely effectiveness, smoking status, whether the person has dependents, whether they are a healthcare worker, and whether they have a disability or not. Estimating marginal rates of substitution between patient characteristics and chance of survival if ventilated yielded values of up to 30 percentage points if the patient was 70 years old relative to being 30. However, respondents typically said they would prefer such decisions to be made by medical professionals.
conclusionThis study demonstrated the preferences of the community to allocation of ventilators during the COVID-19 pandemic. The use of such information should be treated with some caution as the underlying reason for such preferences are unclear, and respondents themselves preferred the decision to be made by others.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.