Current replication
Spearman rank correlation
Not measuredNo current measurement is available in this registry.
Research study · 2022
Hierarchical Medical: What are the Factors Driving ESKD Patients to Choose Community Hemodialysis Centers in China? A Labelled Discrete Choice Experiment
Explore the published experiment and its available replication evidence.
Read the paper ↗01 / Human finding
What the study found
A reviewed summary is not available in this registry. Consult the published paper for the original finding.
Answer-key review: Not reviewed
02 / Experiment design
Who chose, and what varied
- Country
- Wuhan, Hubei Province, China
- Human respondents
- Not recorded
- Attributes
- 5
- Task
- discrete choice
03 / Synthetic replication
Registry replication results
Paper-era reference
2023 CLM mean Spearman ρ
Not measuredHistorical results use their original estimator and reference. They are not a matched comparison with the current run.
Detailed replication evidence · 2026-11-02
Right direction on all 4 significant effects, close ranking (ρ = 0.84); sizes not comparable (the paper reports logit coefficients).
Use it to screen and rank which attributes move choice; sizes need the paper's respondent data.
- direction
- holds
- rank
- holds
- size
- not comparable
Supported uses
- Screening which attributes move choice, and in which direction.
- Ranking attributes and levels by how strongly they move choice.
Limits to keep in view
- Effect sizes in the paper's units; only direction, rank and shape are compared.
Effects on a common scale
Human effects: logit coefficient. Synthetic effects are multiplied by the record’s calibration factor, k = 4.5559. Calibration aligns magnitude; it does not establish agreement in unadjusted effect sizes.
| Attribute / level | Human | Human 95% half-width | Calibrated synthetic |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type of hemodialysis doctors: Different doctors (reference) | 0.000 | Not measured | 0.000 |
| Type of hemodialysis doctors: Regular doctors | 1.087 | Not measured | 0.112 |
| Continuing care: None (reference) | 0.000 | Not measured | 0.000 |
| Continuing care: Telephone/online follow-up | 0.141 | Not measured | 0.699 |
| Continuing care: Home-based offline follow-up | 0.257 | Not measured | 0.855 |
| Handling of critical situation: Ineffective referral pathway (reference) | 0.000 | Not measured | 0.000 |
| Handling of critical situation: Smooth and effective referral | 1.343 | Not measured | 1.274 |
| Travel time: 40 mins (reference) | 0.000 | Not measured | 0.000 |
| Travel time: 20 mins | 0.695 | Not measured | 0.582 |
Subgroups · screen, not a result
Split by age: 0 of 1 significant differences keep their direction in the simulation (0% to 79%)
screen, not a result. Each row is the older group’s effect minus the younger group’s, human in logit, simulated on the simulation’s own scale, so compare direction, not size. A Jev fast-small screen makes no comparison claim.
- Sign agreement
- 0/1, 0%
- 95% interval
- 0% to 79%
- Shuffle null
- 48%, p 0.93
- Shape ρ
- –
- Scale ratio
- –
| Group | Simulated n | People n | ρ vs paper |
|---|---|---|---|
| older | 45 | not given | – |
| younger | 51 | not given | – |
| Attribute / level | People Δ (95%) | Significant | Simulated Δ (own scale) | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Travel time: 20 mins | +0.39 ±0.32 | yes | -0.07 ±0.11 | opposite |
04 / Evidence and limitations
Follow the evidence
Missing results mean unmeasured, not zero agreement.
- missing parent paper url
- missing canonical pdf
- missing historic score
- missing resolved wandb run