Your privacy, your choice

We use essential cookies to make sure the site can function. We also use optional cookies for advertising, personalisation of content, usage analysis, and social media.

By accepting optional cookies, you consent to the processing of your personal data - including transfers to third parties. Some third parties are outside of the European Economic Area, with varying standards of data protection.

See our privacy policy for more information on the use of your personal data.

for further information and to change your choices.
Skip to main content
Fig. 3 | Alzheimer's Research & Therapy

Fig. 3

From: Public perceptions related to healthcare preparedness to anti-amyloid therapies for Alzheimer’s Disease in Japan

Fig. 3

Mixed logistic regression analysis for pros/cons about prioritizing patients or facilities in each dataset. Compared to the acceptance of prioritization in terms of medical rationale, economical aspects was consistently less likely to cause acceptance towards prioritizing patients (A, approximately 0.4–0.5 of OR) across the examined surveys, and addressing vulnerable individuals was the reason that consistently accompanied least likelihood to accept for prioritizing patients (A, approximately 0.2 of OR). Meanwhile, compared to the acceptance of prioritization in terms of medical rationale, addressing vulnerable people or the impact on patients’ lives showed significantly lowered likelihood to accept for prioritizing facilities (B) across the examined surveys consistently, while the economical aspects did not show significant increase or decrease in OR as a focus to accept for facility prioritization (i.e., 95%CI overlapping with the OR = 1). Abbreviations: J-TRC, Japanese trial-ready cohort; CI, confidence interval

Back to article page

Alzheimer's Research & Therapy

ISSN: 1758-9193