Medical crowdfunding for organ transplantation

Durand, Wesley M.; Peters, Jillian; Eltorai, Adam E.M.; Kalagara, Saisanjana; Osband, Adena J.; Daniels, Alan H.

doi:10.1111/ctr.13267

Cited by 36 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 28 publications

(58 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It collected data from Kickstarter to identify crowdfunding platform rules to maximize transaction volume [16]. In addition, focusing on the medical crowdfunding campaigns for organ transplantation behavior, a study by Durand et al [20] found, after applying bivariate and multivariate analyses, that more positive sentiment, lengthier campaign description, higher goal amount, and third person description positively affect the amount of fund raised by the campaign. As can be seen from these studies, the results are inconsistent and the factors affecting the success of crowdfunding campaigns are not very clear.…”

Section: Literature Review 21 Crowdsourcing and Crowdfunding Phenomenamentioning

confidence: 99%

Success Factors of Donation-Based Crowdfunding Campaigns: A Machine Learning Approach

Alazazi¹,

Wang²,

Allan³

2020

Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crowdfunding has emerged as an alternative mechanism to traditional financing mechanisms in which individuals solicit financial capital or donation from the crowd. The success factors of crowdfunding are not well-understood, particularly for donationbased crowdfunding platforms. This study identifies key drivers of donation-based crowdfunding campaign success using a machine learning approach. Based on an analysis of crowdfunding campaigns from Gofundme.com, we show that our models were able to predict the average daily amount received at a high level of accuracy using variables available at the beginning of the campaign and the number of days it had been posted. In addition, Facebook and Twitter shares and the number of likes, improved the accuracy of the models. Among the six machine learning algorithms we used, support vector machine (SVM) performs the best in predicting campaign success.

show abstract

Section: Literature Review 21 Crowdsourcing and Crowdfunding Phenomenamentioning

confidence: 99%

Success Factors of Donation-Based Crowdfunding Campaigns: A Machine Learning Approach

Alazazi¹,

Wang²,

Allan³

2020

Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, Gofundme claims that sharing via Facebook increases donations by "350%". A strong positive correlation was also found between the times shared in social media and the amount raised for organ transplantation crowdfunding (Durand et al, 2018). Commercial crowdfunding literature finds similar effects (e.g., Lu et al, 2014).…”

Section: Differences Between Crowdfunding and Informal Safety Nets: Tmentioning

confidence: 65%

New Digital Safety Net or Just More ‘Friendfunding’? Institutional Analysis of Medical Crowdfunding in the United States

Lee

Lehdonvirta

2020

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crowdfunding is becoming a popular way of financing healthcare. Some commentators suggest that crowdfunding could serve as a new institution that fills gaps in conventional safety nets. Others suggest that crowdfunding is simply another way of obtaining help from family, friends, and local associations, and has little transformative potential. We provide one of the first quantitative analyses of medical crowdfunding, and the first to model the broader societal context in which campaigns are situated. We scraped data on US medical campaigns from the leading platform, and combined them with county-level socioeconomic data to model predictors of campaign frequency and success. Our findings suggest that many seek help from crowdfunding when both formal and informal conventional safety nets fail them. Significantly more campaigns are initiated in US counties with poorer private insurance coverage, lower social security provision, fewer social associations, and weaker cultures of giving. However, campaigns are least likely to reach their goals where most needed. Campaigns are more likely to be successful in counties that are wealthier and healthier, and have more social associations. Crowdfunding is not merely 'friendfunding': fundraisers can increase their chances of success by having their appeals widely shared on social media. However, the returns to sharing are greater for campaigns initiated in wealthier areas. Overall, our findings suggest that medical crowdfunding is an entrepreneurial safety net: one where protection is not afforded universally or on the basis of need, but on the basis of one's ability to appeal to the audience and outcompete rivaling needfuls.

show abstract

“…Similarly, in a US study of 850 campaigns for organ transplantation, females had raised 27% less than males after multivariable adjustment. 12 In a CAN study of 319 campaigns, being a visible ethnic minority was associated with raising 15% less in funds, before adjustment for technological competency (using quantity of campaign images, videos, updates, and perks) and 6% less after adjustments. 7 Race and gender disparities reflect the pillars on which MCF is dependent: access to technology, literacy, social capital, and perception.…”

Section: Beneficiary Demographics and Inequities In Crowdfundingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Initial regression analysis did not demonstrate a fundraising association with Facebook shares, but further sensitivity analysis that excluded donor numbers from the model, showed a strong association between Facebook shares and funds raised, reflecting moderate collinearity between Facebook shares and donor numbers. Previous crowdfunding research has shown that demographics 7,12 , donor numbers 39 , fundraising goal 11,12 , campaign narrative length 11,12,40 , and social media presence 4,7,40 are predictors of crowdfunding success. Setting a higher goal for medical campaigns may indirectly communicate depth of need to donors and promote the concept of "deservingness."…”

Section: Beneficiary Demographics and Inequities In Crowdfundingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crowdfunding Medical Care: A Comparison of Online Medical Fundraising in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States

Saleh

Ajufo

Lehmann

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Medical crowdfunding is increasingly used to finance personal healthcare costs in Canada (CAN), United Kingdom (UK), and United States (US) despite major differences in their healthcare systems. Yet, it lacks comparative descriptive research to guide policy changes that can promote equitable and accessible healthcare. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of Canadian, British, and American campaigns between February 2018 and March 2019 on the GoFundMe platform (n=3,396). We extracted and manually reviewed variables from campaigns on each country's GoFundMe discovery webpage, explored campaign characteristics, and compared each country's campaign demographics to its respective national census. We fit multivariate linear regression models for funds raised for the cohort and for each country. Results: We examined 1,091 Canadian, 1,082 British, and 1,223 American campaigns. US campaigns (median [IQR] $38,204 [$31,200 to $52,123]) raised more funds than those in CAN ($12,662 [$9,377 to $19,251]) and the UK ($6,285 [$4,028 to $12,348]). Female (38.4% of campaigns vs. 50.9% of US census; p<0.001) and black (5.3% of campaigns vs. 13.4% of US census; p<0.001) beneficiaries were underrepresented in US campaigns. In the full cohort, blacks raised $4,007 less (95% confidence interval [CI] -$6,913 to -$1,101; p=0.007) and males raised $1,742 more (95% CI $583 to $2,901; p=0.003) per campaign. Cancer was the most common diagnosis represented overall (54.5%). Across all diagnoses, campaigns primarily for routine treatment expenses were three times more common in the United States compared to Canada and the United Kingdom (CAN 21.9% vs. UK 26.6% vs. US 77.9%; p<0.001). However, campaigns with routine care were less successful overall, raising $4,589 less per campaign (CI -$6,429 to -$2,749; p<0.001). Campaigns primarily for alternative treatment expenses were nearly five times as common for cancer (24%) than for non-cancer (5%) diagnoses. Discussion: The trends observed suggest that there are important gaps in healthcare provision in all of the countries examined across a wide range of diagnoses. Although medical crowdfunding has the potential to provide short-term relief from medical financial burden for a privileged subset of patients, it may carry wider-reaching adverse societal effects including the promotion of racial and gender disparities in healthcare. Further work is needed to inform policy changes that promote equitable and accessible healthcare through this practice.

show abstract

Medical crowdfunding for organ transplantation

Cited by 36 publications

References 28 publications

Success Factors of Donation-Based Crowdfunding Campaigns: A Machine Learning Approach

Success Factors of Donation-Based Crowdfunding Campaigns: A Machine Learning Approach

New Digital Safety Net or Just More ‘Friendfunding’? Institutional Analysis of Medical Crowdfunding in the United States

Crowdfunding Medical Care: A Comparison of Online Medical Fundraising in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About