Hypothetical versus experienced health state valuation: a qualitative study of adult general public views and preferences

Proxy Preferences and the Values of Children's Health States

To assign values to the health states of children, some health economists have suggested relying on the 'proxy' preferences among the health states of children expressed by a random sample of the adult population. These preferences have been elicited in several ways, with respondents sometimes asked to express their (adult) preferences among the health states of children, and sometimes asked to imagine themselves as children and to express what they think their preferences would be. This essay discusses three grounds for eliciting the preferences of a random sample of adults that have been suggested as ways to assign values to the health states in the EQ-5D-Y, and criticizes the first two: (1) the evidential ground: the preferences of the population sample are good evidence of how good or bad the health states of children are; (2) the 'taxpayer' ground: the adult population has the authority to assign values to health states, therefore their preferences are determinative; and (3) the pragmatic grounds: surveying is straightforward and shifts the responsibility from health economists to the population. I argue that instead of surveying a random sample of the population, health economists should rely on deliberative groups that include older children, experts on children's health and development, as well as members of the population at large. These groups should engage with the reasons that lie behind preferences among health states.

Derivation and Initial Validation of the Utility Function for the Hearing Utility Measure (HUM)

OBJECTIVE

The Hearing Utility Measure (HUM) is a replacement hearing attribute for the Health Utilities Index, Mark 3 (HUI-3) designed to improve the responsiveness of utility estimates to changes in hearing-related quality of life. The final development step is to derive the instrument's utility scoring function.

METHODS

Residents of Ontario, Canada, aged ≥18 years participated in standard gamble and visual analogue scale exercises. Valuations for levels (response options) within each domain, and for each domain relative to the other domains were elicited and used to generate a hearing utility function. The function outputs hearing utility ranging from 0 = 'unable to hear at all' to 1 = 'perfect hearing' for each of the 25,920 hearing states classifiable by the HUM. Performance was assessed relative to the criterion standard: directly elicited standard gamble utility. Distributions of HUM-derived hearing utility were compared with legacy HUI-3 derived estimates.

RESULTS

A total of 126 respondents participated (mean age 39.2, range 18-85 years, 53% female [67/126]). The utility function performed well in the estimation of directly elicited utilities (mean difference 0.03, RMSE 0.06). Using the legacy HUI-3, estimated hearing utility was 1.0 for 118/126 respondents (93.6%) compared with just 66/126 (52.4%) using the HUM.

CONCLUSION

The new hearing attribute is capable of measuring variations in hearing utility not captured by the legacy HUI-3, especially near the ceiling of hearing function. These findings justify its application and further work to study its measurement properties in hearing loss populations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 2024.

Examining how well economic evaluations capture the value of mental health

Health economics evidence informs health-care decision making, but the field has historically paid insufficient attention to mental health. Economic evaluations in health should define an appropriate scope for benefits and costs and how to value them. This Health Policy provides an overview of these processes and considers to what extent they capture the value of mental health. We suggest that although current practices are both transparent and justifiable, they have distinct limitations from the perspective of mental health. Most social value judgements, such as the exclusion of interindividual outcomes and intersectoral costs, diminish the value of improving mental health, and this reduction in value might be disproportionate compared with other types of health. Economic analyses might have disadvantaged interventions that improve mental health compared with physical health, but research is required to test the size of such differential effects and any subsequent effect on decision-making systems such as health technology assessment systems. Collaboration between health economics and the mental health sciences is crucial for achieving mental-physical health parity in evaluative frameworks and, ultimately, improving population mental health.