Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37314802›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Blood Donors' Preferences Toward Incentives for Donation in China.

Yu Wang, Peicong Zhai, Shan Jiang, Chaofan Li, Shunping Li

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. What Drives Public Preference for Rare Drugs Coverage in China? Insights From a Multi-Center Discrete Choice Experiment.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Error in Bylines.JAMA network open · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Yu WangCenter for Health Management and Policy Research, School of Public Health, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Peicong ZhaiBlood Center of Shandong Province, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Shan JiangMacquarie University Centre for the Health Economy, Macquarie Business School and Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Chaofan LiCenter for Health Management and Policy Research, School of Public Health, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Shunping LiCenter for Health Management and Policy Research, School of Public Health, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Shandong University · CNMacquarie University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Blood donation is critical for health care systems, but donor retention remains challenging. Understanding donors' preferences can inform incentive design and improve retention rates. Objective: To identify donor preferences for incentive attributes and their relative importance in promoting blood donation among Chinese donors in Shandong. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study fielded a discrete choice experiment (DCE) with a dual response design among blood donors, analyzing the responses under forced and unforced choice settings. The study took place from January 1 to April 30, 2022, in 3 cities (Yantai, Jinan, and Heze) representing diverse socioeconomic strata in Shandong, China. Eligible participants were blood donors aged 18 to 60 years who had donated within the preceding 12 months. Participants were recruited using convenience sampling. Data were analyzed from May to June 2022. Exposure: Respondents were presented with different blood donation incentive profiles, varying in health examination, blood recipient, honor recognition, travel time, and gift value. Main Outcome and Measure: Respondent preferences for nonmonetary incentive attributes, attribute relative importance, willingness-to-discard values for attribute improvement, and estimated uptake of new incentive profiles. Results: A total of 650 donors were invited, of which 477 were included for analysis. The respondents were predominately male (308 respondents [64.6%]), aged 18 to 34 years (291 respondents [61.0%]), and had undergraduate degrees or higher (286 respondents [59.9%]). Among the 477 valid respondents, the mean (SD) age was 31.9 (11.2) years. Respondents preferred comprehensive health examination, family members as recipients, central government recognition, 30-minute travel time, and a gift valued at 60 Renminbi (RMB). No significant differences were found between the model results of forced and unforced choice setting. Blood recipient was the most important attribute, followed by health examination and gifts, and then honor and travel time. Respondents were willing to discard RMB 32 (95% CI, 18-46) for an improved health examination and RMB 69 (95% CI, 47-92) for changing the recipient from themselves to family members. Scenario analysis estimated 80.3% (SE, 0.024) of donors would endorse the new incentive profile if the recipient was changed from themselves to family members. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, blood recipient, health examination, and gift value were perceived more important as nonmonetary incentives than travel time and honor recognition. Tailoring incentives according to these preferences may improve donor retention. Further research could help refine and optimize incentive schemes for blood donation promotion.

Indexed as

Blood DonationBlood DonorsMotivationAdolescentAdultAsian PeopleChinaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID37314802
PMCPMC10267764
OpenAlexW4380577386

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.