IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/29857.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Improving the Availability of Unrelated Stem Cell Donors: Evidence from a Major Donor Registry

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Haylock
  • Patrick Kampkötter
  • Mario Macis
  • Jürgen Sauter
  • Susanne Seitz
  • Robert Slonim
  • Daniel Wiesen
  • Alexander H. Schmidt

Abstract

The unavailability of potential stem cell donors poses a critical challenge for donor registries worldwide. This study investigates the impact of initiatives of a stem cell donor registry to enhance donors' availability for confirmatory typing. Initiatives ask donors to provide a sample for genetic analysis and/or information on their temporal unavailability. We analyzed 91,479 confirmatory typing requests from DKMS Germany, a large stem cell donor registry, exploiting a quasi-random initiative assignment based on observable characteristics. We find that, first, invitation to the initiatives increases donors' availability. Intention-to-treat estimates yield effects ranging from 2.5 to 3.2 percentage points, and local average treatment effects estimates range from 3.8 to 8.2 percentage points (baseline: 77.1%). Second, the difference in availability between participants and non-participants is over 10 percentage points. The initiatives yield a direct positive effect on donor availability and a selection effect through which participation signals a higher commitment.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Haylock & Patrick Kampkötter & Mario Macis & Jürgen Sauter & Susanne Seitz & Robert Slonim & Daniel Wiesen & Alexander H. Schmidt, 2022. "Improving the Availability of Unrelated Stem Cell Donors: Evidence from a Major Donor Registry," NBER Working Papers 29857, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:29857
    Note: EH
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w29857.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goette, Lorenz & Stutzer, Alois, 2020. "Blood donations and incentives: Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 52-74.
    2. Nicola Lacetera & Mario Macis & Robert Slonim, 2012. "Will There Be Blood? Incentives and Displacement Effects in Pro-social Behavior," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 4(1), pages 186-223, February.
    3. Emily Oster, 2019. "Unobservable Selection and Coefficient Stability: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(2), pages 187-204, April.
    4. Ashley C. Craig & Ellen Garbarino & Stephanie A. Heger & Robert Slonim, 2017. "Waiting To Give: Stated and Revealed Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(11), pages 3672-3690, November.
    5. Imbens, Guido W & Angrist, Joshua D, 1994. "Identification and Estimation of Local Average Treatment Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(2), pages 467-475, March.
    6. Wildman, John & Hollingsworth, Bruce, 2009. "Blood donation and the nature of altruism," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 492-503, March.
    7. Theodore C. Bergstrom & Rodney J. Garratt & Damien Sheehan-Connor, 2009. "One Chance in a Million: Altruism and the Bone Marrow Registry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1309-1334, September.
    8. Alois Stutzer & Lorenz Goette & Michael Zehnder, 2011. "Active Decisions and Prosocial Behaviour: a Field Experiment on Blood Donation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(556), pages 476-493, November.
    9. Robert Slonim & Carmen Wang & Ellen Garbarino, 2014. "The Market for Blood," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 28(2), pages 177-196, Spring.
    10. James Heckman, 1997. "Instrumental Variables: A Study of Implicit Behavioral Assumptions Used in Making Program Evaluations," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 32(3), pages 441-462.
    11. Stephanie A. Heger & Robert Slonim & Ellen Garbarino & Carmen Wang & Daniel Waller, 2020. "Redesigning the Market for Volunteers: A Donor Registry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(8), pages 3528-3541, August.
    12. Lacetera, Nicola & Macis, Mario & Stith, Sarah S., 2014. "Removing financial barriers to organ and bone marrow donation: The effect of leave and tax legislation in the U.S," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 43-56.
    13. Alexander H Schmidt & Ute V Solloch & Daniel Baier & Alois Grathwohl & Jan Hofmann & Julia Pingel & Andrea Stahr & Gerhard Ehninger, 2011. "Support of Unrelated Stem Cell Donor Searches by Donor Center-Initiated HLA Typing of Potentially Matching Donors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(5), pages 1-5, May.
    14. Exley, Christine L. & Petrie, Ragan, 2018. "The impact of a surprise donation ask," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 152-167.
    15. Dasgupta, Kushan, 2018. "Generosity and compliance: Recruitment-work and the pathways to participation in bone marrow donation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 86-92.
    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. Bruhin, Adrian & Goette, Lorenz & Haenni, Simon & Jiang, Lingqing, 2020. "Spillovers of prosocial motivation: Evidence from an intervention study on blood donors," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    2. Goette, Lorenz & Stutzer, Alois, 2020. "Blood donations and incentives: Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 52-74.
    3. Sun, Tianshu & Lu, Susan Feng & Jin, Ginger Zhe, 2016. "Solving shortage in a priceless market: Insights from blood donation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 149-165.
    4. Joan Costa-Font & Mireia Jofre-Bonet & Steven T. Yen, 2013. "Not All Incentives Wash Out the Warm Glow: The Case of Blood Donation Revisited," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(4), pages 529-551, November.
    5. Stephanie A. Heger & Robert Slonim & Ellen Garbarino & Carmen Wang & Daniel Waller, 2020. "Redesigning the Market for Volunteers: A Donor Registry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(8), pages 3528-3541, August.
    6. Nicola Lacetera & Mario Macis & Robert Slonim, 2014. "Rewarding Volunteers: A Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(5), pages 1107-1129, May.
    7. Judd B. Kessler & Alvin E. Roth, 2014. "Don't Take 'No' For An Answer: An Experiment With Actual Organ Donor Registrations," NBER Working Papers 20378, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Slonim, Robert & Wang, Carmen, 2016. "Market Design for Altruistic Supply: Evidence from the Lab," IZA Discussion Papers 9650, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Lacetera, Nicola & Macis, Mario & Stith, Sarah S., 2014. "Removing financial barriers to organ and bone marrow donation: The effect of leave and tax legislation in the U.S," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 43-56.
    10. Sara R. Machado, 2020. "Estimating the Blood Supply Elasticity: Evidence from a Universal Scale Benefit Scheme," Papers 2012.01814, arXiv.org.
    11. Bergstrom, Ted & Garratt, Rodney & Leo, Greg, 2019. "Let me, or let George? Motives of competing altruists," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 269-283.
    12. Nagurney, Anna & Dutta, Pritha, 2019. "Competition for blood donations," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 103-114.
    13. Meyer, Christian Johannes & Tripodi, Egon, 2021. "Image concerns in pledges to give blood: Evidence from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    14. Leipnitz, Sigrun & de Vries, Martha & Clement, Michel & Mazar, Nina, 2018. "Providing health checks as incentives to retain blood donors — Evidence from two field experiments," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 628-640.
    15. Guodong Gao & Tianshu Sun & Ginger Zhe Jin, 2015. "Mobile Messaging for Offline Social Interactions: A Large Field Expeiment," Natural Field Experiments 00571, The Field Experiments Website.
    16. Ai Takeuchi & Erika Seki, 2019. "Coordination and free-riding problems in blood donations," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 19-15, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    17. Tianshu Sun & Susan Feng Lu & Ginger Zhe Jin, 2015. "Solving Shortage in a Priceless Market: Insights from Blood Donation," NBER Working Papers 21312, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Tianshu Sun & Guodong (Gordon) Gao & Ginger Zhe Jin, 2015. "Mobile Messaging for Offline Group Formation in Prosocial Activities: A Large Field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 21704, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Roxana Elena Manea, 2021. "School Feeding Programmes, Education and Food Security in Rural Malawi," CIES Research Paper series 63-2020, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    20. Maja Adena & Julian Harke, 2022. "COVID-19 and pro-sociality: How do donors respond to local pandemic severity, increased salience, and media coverage?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 824-844, June.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:nbr:nberwo:29857. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.