Gauging Incentive Values and Expectations (G.I.V.E.) among Blood Donors for Nonmonetary Incentives: Developing a Preference Elicitation Instrument through Qualitative Approaches in Shandong, China.
Yu Wang, Peicong Zhai, Yue Zhang, Shan Jiang, Gang Chen, Shunping Li
{"title":"Gauging Incentive Values and Expectations (G.I.V.E.) among Blood Donors for Nonmonetary Incentives: Developing a Preference Elicitation Instrument through Qualitative Approaches in Shandong, China.","authors":"Yu Wang, Peicong Zhai, Yue Zhang, Shan Jiang, Gang Chen, Shunping Li","doi":"10.1007/s40271-023-00639-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Blood donation rates remain suboptimal in China necessitating the reform of the current nonmonetary incentive system to motivate donors. This study aims to identify relevant attributes and levels for nonmonetary incentives in repeated blood donation and provide insights for the development of preference elicitation instruments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A qualitative research process was employed, including a literature review, in-depth interviews, attribute ranking, focus group discussions, and cognitive interviews, to identify potential nonmonetary incentives for blood donation. The identified attributes were then incorporated into a discrete choice experiment (DCE) study design. The comprehensibility and acceptability of the DCE questionnaire were assessed through cognitive interviews and a pilot study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five nonmonetary incentive attributes were identified, including health examination, designated blood recipient, honor for donation, travel time, and gifts. The designated recipient of blood donation emerged as the most important motivator for future donations among the participants. The cognitive interviews and pilot study provided valuable feedback for refining the DCE questionnaire and ensuring its reliability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study contributes to the understanding of nonmonetary incentives for blood donation and highlights the importance of designated blood recipients, health examination, honor for donation, travel time, and gifts as potential motivators. Moreover, it emphasizes the value of employing cognitive interviews and pilot studies in the development and refinement of DCE questionnaires, ultimately enhancing the reliability and validity of preference elicitation instruments.</p>","PeriodicalId":51271,"journal":{"name":"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-023-00639-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Blood donation rates remain suboptimal in China necessitating the reform of the current nonmonetary incentive system to motivate donors. This study aims to identify relevant attributes and levels for nonmonetary incentives in repeated blood donation and provide insights for the development of preference elicitation instruments.
Methods: A qualitative research process was employed, including a literature review, in-depth interviews, attribute ranking, focus group discussions, and cognitive interviews, to identify potential nonmonetary incentives for blood donation. The identified attributes were then incorporated into a discrete choice experiment (DCE) study design. The comprehensibility and acceptability of the DCE questionnaire were assessed through cognitive interviews and a pilot study.
Results: Five nonmonetary incentive attributes were identified, including health examination, designated blood recipient, honor for donation, travel time, and gifts. The designated recipient of blood donation emerged as the most important motivator for future donations among the participants. The cognitive interviews and pilot study provided valuable feedback for refining the DCE questionnaire and ensuring its reliability.
Conclusion: This study contributes to the understanding of nonmonetary incentives for blood donation and highlights the importance of designated blood recipients, health examination, honor for donation, travel time, and gifts as potential motivators. Moreover, it emphasizes the value of employing cognitive interviews and pilot studies in the development and refinement of DCE questionnaires, ultimately enhancing the reliability and validity of preference elicitation instruments.
期刊介绍:
The Patient provides a venue for scientifically rigorous, timely, and relevant research to promote the development, evaluation and implementation of therapies, technologies, and innovations that will enhance the patient experience. It is an international forum for research that advances and/or applies qualitative or quantitative methods to promote the generation, synthesis, or interpretation of evidence.
The journal has specific interest in receiving original research, reviews and commentaries related to qualitative and mixed methods research, stated-preference methods, patient reported outcomes, and shared decision making.
Advances in regulatory science, patient-focused drug development, patient-centered benefit-risk and health technology assessment will also be considered.
Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in The Patient may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.
All manuscripts are subject to peer review by international experts.