Skip to main content

Table 1 Sample characteristics and descriptive statistics

From: Determinants of acceptance of end-of-life interventions: a comparison between withdrawing life-prolonging treatment and euthanasia in Austria

 

Sample characteristics

Approval

 
  

None

WLPT only

EUT (and WLPT)

 

Categorical Variables

N (%)

%

%

%

χ2 p-value

Total sample

1,578 (100.0)

22.6

23.1

54.3

-

Gender

     

 Male

739 (46.8)

19.8

21.7

58.6

0.004

 Female

839 (53.2)

25.0

24.4

50.5

 

Education

     

 Compulsory school

206 (13.1)

33.0

19.4

47.6

<0.001

 Apprentice/vocational

940 (59.6)

22.9

21.2

56.0

 

 High school diploma

232 (14.7)

22.4

25.4

52.2

 

 University

200 (12.7)

10.5

33.5

56.0

 

Confession

     

 Catholic

1,157 (73.3)

25.2

24.3

50.6

<0.001

 Protestant

66 (4.2)

15.2

34.8

50.0

 

 Muslim

45 (2.9)

40.0

15.6

44.4

 

 Other

38 (2.4)

13.2

28.9

57.9

 

 No Confession

272 (17.2)

11.8

15.8

72.4

 

Household size

     

 Single

563 (35.7)

20.4

22.9

56.7

0.072

 Dual

569 (36.1)

23.2

20.7

56.1

 

 3+ Persons

446 (28.3)

24.3

26.5

49.1

 

Cared for ill

     

 No

1,091 (69.1)

23.3

20.7

56.0

0.003

 Yes

487 (30.9)

20.9

28.5

50.5

 

Cared for dying

     

 No

1,111 (70.4)

23.8

20.5

55.7

<0.001

 Yes

467 (29.6)

19.7

29.3

51.0

 

Occupation health sector

     

 No

1,495 (94.7)

22.7

22.5

54.8

0.060

 Yes

83 83 (5.3)

20.5

33.7

45.8

 

Continuous variables

N (mean ± sd)

mean (sd)

mean (sd)

mean (sd)

anova p-values

Age (years)

1,578 (49.7 ± 16.3)

50.1 (17.3)

51.0 (15.7)

49.0 (16.1)

0.450/0.270

Subjective Health (1–5)

1,578 (2.04 ± 0.88)

2.13 (0.84)

2.03 (0.87)

2.02 (0.90)

0.131/0.048

Religiosity (1–4)

1,578 (2.70 ± 0.89)

2.48 (0.97)

2.52 (0.82)

2.88 (0.85)

0.590/<0.001

Liberalism (1–4)

1,578 (2.22 ± 0.73)

2.57 (0.91)

2.09 (0.61)

2.15 (0.69)

<0.001/<0.001

  1. Unweighted data. WLPT = withdrawing life-prolonging treatment, EUT = euthanasia. Reference category = non-acceptance of both WLPT and EUT. The first anova p-value refers to WLPT only, the second to EUT (and WLPT) in comparison to the reference category non-acceptance of both WLPT and EUT. Differences to 100 % per row are due to rounding