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 and Shunping Li ()
Additional contact information
Yu Wang: Shandong University
Peicong Zhai: Blood Center of Shandong Province
Yue Zhang: Shandong University
Shan Jiang: Macquarie University
Gang Chen: Monash University
Shunping Li: Shandong University

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2023, vol. 16, issue 6, No 3, 593-606

Abstract: 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.

Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-023-00639-6 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:patien:v:16:y:2023:i:6:d:10.1007_s40271-023-00639-6

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40271

DOI: 10.1007/s40271-023-00639-6

Access Statistics for this article

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research is currently edited by Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research from Springer, International Academy of Health Preference Research
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().