Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33673813›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2021

The perceived deservingness of COVID-19 healthcare in the Netherlands: a conjoint experiment on priority access to intensive care and vaccination.

Tim Reeskens, Femke Roosma, Evelien Wanders

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Which factors drive the choice of the French-speaking Quebec population towards a COVID-19 vaccination programme: A discrete-choice experiment.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The importance of citizenship for deserving COVID-19 treatment.Humanities & social sciences communications · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Tim ReeskensSchool of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000 LE, Tilburg, The Netherlands. t.reeskens@tilburguniversity.edu.
Femke RoosmaSchool of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000 LE, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Evelien WandersSchool of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000 LE, Tilburg, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAmidst the COVID-19 pandemic, governments, health experts, and ethicists have proposed guidelines about ICU triage and priority access to a vaccine. To increase political legitimacy and accountability, public support is important. This study examines what criteria beyond medical need are deemed important to be perceived of priority COVID-19 healthcare access.

methodTwo conjoint experiments about priority over ICU treatment and early COVID-19 vaccination were implemented in a probability-based sample of 1461 respondents representative of the Netherlands. Respondents were asked who should receive treatment out of two fictitious healthcare claimants that differed in in age, weight, complying with corona policy measures, and occupation, all randomly assigned. Average marginal coefficient effects are estimated to assess the relative importance of the attributes; attributes were interacted with relevant respondent characteristics to find whether consensus exists in this relative ranking.

resultsThe Dutch penalize those not complying with coronavirus policy measures, and the obese, but prioritize those employed in 'crucial' sectors. For these conditions, there is consensus among the population. For age, young people are prioritized for ICU treatment, while the middle-aged are given priority over a vaccine, with younger respondents favoring healthcare for elderly claimants, while older respondents favor support for young cohorts.

conclusionPeople who have no control over their social risk and are able to reciprocate to society are considered as more deserving of priority of COVID-19 healthcare. Our findings provide fair support for the implemented ethical guidelines about ICU-treatment and COVID-19 vaccines.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overConsensusCOVID-19Critical CareDelivery of Health CareFemaleHealth FacilitiesHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsPandemicsPractice Guidelines as TopicConjoint experimentCOVID-19Deservingness theoryICULISS panelNetherlandsVaccination

Identifiers

PMID33673813
PMCPMC7934976

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.