Table 2 Verbally reported principles and average hit rates^a

Principle	Verbal reporters: Fraction of respondents describing the principle^a (N = 155)	Areas of prediction^b	Actual average hit rates:^b Total sample (N = 162)	Actual average hit rates:^b Only corresponding verbal reporters	Distribution of hits of corresponding verbal reporters (# subjects x hits)
Equality of health levels (EH)	0.1226	0.1802	0.1801	0.3819	3x2, 3x3, 4x5, 1x6, 2x7, 2x8, 1x9, 2x10, 1x16
Equality of health gains (EG)	0.2000	0.1802	0.3913	0.6575	1x3, 3x4, 4x7, 1x8, 3x9, 5x10, 3x11, 1x12, 3x14, 1x15, 6x16
Equality of treatment time (ER)	0.1290	0.1802	0.2594	0.4875	1x2, 2x3, 1x5, 5x6, 3x7, 2x9, 2x10, 2x11, 2x16
Sum-maximization/Utilitarianism (U)	0.0516	0.1802	0.0719	0.1094	5x0, 1x3, 1x4, 1x7
No Exclusion	0.6194	0.7376	0.9481	0.9631	1x12, 3x13, 13x14, 18x15, 61x16
Preference for sicker patient (lower health level)	0.2839	0.5310	0.6256	0.7200	1x4, 2x6, 2x8, 2x9, 6x10, 7x11, 4x12, 11x13, 7x14, 1x15, 1x16
Conditional rules^c	0.3290	-	-	-	-
Thresholds^c	0.2129	-	-	-	-

^aMultiple answers were permitted
^bThe term “average hit rate” denotes the average fraction of actual choices in all situations fitting to the corresponding principle. See Additional file 2: Table S7 for details on the calculation of areas of prediction and actual average hit rates
^cConditional rules and rules utilising threshold values are very diverse and do not always and in all situations result in clear allocation proposals

ISSN: 1475-9276