IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jchals/v13y2022i1p21-d819338.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Do Young Adults in the United States Have Such Low Rates of Organ Donation Registration?

Author

Listed:
  • Amy J. Wotring

    (College of Health and Human Services, Indiana State University, Terre Haute, IN 47809, USA)

  • Timothy R. Jordan

    (School of Population Health, The University of Toledo, Toledo, OH 43606, USA)

  • Barbara Saltzman

    (School of Population Health, The University of Toledo, Toledo, OH 43606, USA)

  • Tavis Glassman

    (School of Population Health, The University of Toledo, Toledo, OH 43606, USA)

  • Jennifer Holloway

    (University of Toledo Medical Center, The University of Toledo, Toledo, OH 43614, USA)

  • Jagdish Khubchandani

    (College of Health, Education, and Social Transformation, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003, USA)

Abstract

The demand for transplantable organs has outpaced the supply. Thus, 20 Americans die every day while waiting for an organ. Although most adults support organ donation, 42% are not registered. The rate is even lower among young adults who are not enrolled in/never graduated from college. The aim of this study was to use the Integrated Behavior Model (IBM) to identify factors that predicted organ donation registration among a racially diverse sample of non-student young adults. The study was observational and cross-sectional. Proportional allocation was used to identify a racially diverse sample of 550 non-student, young adults from ten states in the U.S. with the lowest registration rates. A valid and reliable survey was designed, pilot-tested, and administered. A total of 407 young adults completed the survey (74%). Only 19% were registered donors. Caucasians were more likely to be registered donors than racial minorities, χ² (3, N = 407) = 15.19, p = 0.002. Those with more positive direct attitudes toward registration were 1.5 times more likely to be registered than those who had negative direct attitudes. Among non-registrants, indirect descriptive norm and direct attitude were statistically significant predictors of behavioral intention. Moreover, those who knew someone who donated an organ and knew someone who needed a transplant were nearly three times more likely to intend to register in the next year. The IBM proved useful in elucidating factors that predicted intention to register among non-student young adults. The IBM should be used by those who desire to increase registration rates.

Suggested Citation

  • Amy J. Wotring & Timothy R. Jordan & Barbara Saltzman & Tavis Glassman & Jennifer Holloway & Jagdish Khubchandani, 2022. "Why Do Young Adults in the United States Have Such Low Rates of Organ Donation Registration?," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jchals:v:13:y:2022:i:1:p:21-:d:819338
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/13/1/21/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2078-1547/13/1/21/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mocan, Naci & Tekin, Erdal, 2007. "The determinants of the willingness to donate an organ among young adults: Evidence from the United States and the European Union," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(12), pages 2527-2538, December.
    2. Guadagnoli, E. & McNamara, P. & Evanisko, M.J. & Beasley, C. & Callender, C.O. & Poretsky, A., 1999. "The influence of race on approaching families for organ donation and their decision to donate," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 89(2), pages 244-247.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schweda, Mark & Schicktanz, Silke, 2009. "Public ideas and values concerning the commercialization of organ donation in four European countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1129-1136, March.
    2. Verheijde, Joseph L. & Rady, Mohamed Y. & McGregor, Joan L. & Friederich-Murray, Catherine, 2009. "Enforcement of presumed-consent policy and willingness to donate organs as identified in the European Union Survey: The role of legislation in reinforcing ideology in pluralistic societies," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 26-31, April.
    3. Selina Schulze Spüntrup, 2023. "Does Implementing Opt-Out Solve The Organ Shortage Problem? Evidence from a Synthetic Control Approach," ifo Working Paper Series 403, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    4. Han, Hua-Jing & Wibral, Matthias, 2020. "Organ donation and reciprocity," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    5. Jacek Bogucki & Wioletta Tuszyńska-Bogucka, 2023. "‘ Be the Match ’. Predictors of Decisions Concerning Registration as a Potential Bone Marrow Donor—A Psycho-Socio-Demographic Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(11), pages 1-14, May.
    6. Alzuabi, Raslan & Brown, Sarah & Taylor, Karl, 2022. "Charitable behaviour and political affiliation: Evidence for the UK," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    7. Naci Mocan & Erdal Tekin, 2005. "The Determinants of the Willingness to be an Organ Donor," NBER Working Papers 11316, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. van Dalen, Hendrik P. & Henkens, Kène, 2014. "Comparing the effects of defaults in organ donation systems," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 137-142.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jchals:v:13:y:2022:i:1:p:21-:d:819338. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.