All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Gender differences in family communication about organ donation
Unformatted Document Text:  18 that organ donation is act of compassion (M=1.85, sd=.84), an unselfish act (M=1.79, sd=.81), a natural way to prolong life (M=2.03, sd=.96), and a benefit to humanity (M=1.81, sd=.78). The final items of the questionnaire acquired demographic data, which were reported in the Methods section. Responses to the open-ended questions were coded into categories, which are noted in Appendix B. Question 4 asked respondents to describe, in as much detail as possible, the most significant conversation they could recall about organ donation with a family member. The results indicated that the most common response for this item was no response at all (n=276, 32.2%), as those respondents who had not had such a conversation could not describe it. Similarly, 17 (2%) could not recall the details of the conversation, 84 (9.8%) specifically noted that they hadn’t discussed donation, and 25 (2.9%) gave an ambiguous response which did not really fit the question. Of those who did describe a conversation, most indicated that the respondent had just informed the family member that they either did or did not want to donate organs, or which organs they wanted to donate (n=185, 21.6%). The next highest category was presenting moral or altruistic reasons for donation (n=110, 12.9%), followed by relating a family story or a story about someone else (n=33, 3.9%). Twenty- two people (2.6%) simply noted that they had made the decision when they received their driver’s licenses. Twelve people (1.4%) talked about whether signing a donation card would affect the medical care they might receive, 15 people (1.8%) discussed how donation and transplantation work, 12 (1.4%) related a personal story, 13 (1.5%) mentioned religious or moral issues, 17 (2%) specifically noted discrepancies between themselves and the family member in attitudes toward donation or reported support or

Authors: Thompson, Teresa., Robinson, James. and Kenny, Wade.
first   previous   Page 18 of 48   next   last



background image
18
that organ donation is act of compassion (M=1.85, sd=.84), an unselfish act (M=1.79,
sd=.81), a natural way to prolong life (M=2.03, sd=.96), and a benefit to humanity
(M=1.81, sd=.78).
The final items of the questionnaire acquired demographic data, which were
reported in the Methods section. Responses to the open-ended questions were coded into
categories, which are noted in Appendix B. Question 4 asked respondents to describe, in
as much detail as possible, the most significant conversation they could recall about
organ donation with a family member. The results indicated that the most common
response for this item was no response at all (n=276, 32.2%), as those respondents who
had not had such a conversation could not describe it. Similarly, 17 (2%) could not recall
the details of the conversation, 84 (9.8%) specifically noted that they hadn’t discussed
donation, and 25 (2.9%) gave an ambiguous response which did not really fit the
question. Of those who did describe a conversation, most indicated that the respondent
had just informed the family member that they either did or did not want to donate
organs, or which organs they wanted to donate (n=185, 21.6%). The next highest
category was presenting moral or altruistic reasons for donation (n=110, 12.9%),
followed by relating a family story or a story about someone else (n=33, 3.9%). Twenty-
two people (2.6%) simply noted that they had made the decision when they received their
driver’s licenses. Twelve people (1.4%) talked about whether signing a donation card
would affect the medical care they might receive, 15 people (1.8%) discussed how
donation and transplantation work, 12 (1.4%) related a personal story, 13 (1.5%)
mentioned religious or moral issues, 17 (2%) specifically noted discrepancies between
themselves and the family member in attitudes toward donation or reported support or


Convention
All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 18 of 48   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.