Think of the Children: A Discussion of the Rationale for and Implications of the Perspective Used for EQ-5D-Y Health State Valuation

Estimating an EQ-5D-Y-3L Value Set for Brazil

INTRODUCTION

The EQ-5D-Y-3L is a generic measure of health-related quality of life in children and adolescents. Although the Brazilian-Portuguese EQ-5D-Y-3L version is available, there is no value set for it, hampering its use in economic evaluations. This study aimed to elicit a Brazilian EQ-5D-Y-3L value set based on preferences of the general adult population.

METHODS

Two independent samples of adults participated in an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey and a composite time trade-off (cTTO) face-to-face interview. The framing was "considering your views for a 10-year-old child". DCE data were analyzed using a mixed-logit model. The 243 DCE predicted values were mapped into the observed 28 cTTO values using linear and non-linear mapping approaches with and without intercept. Mapping approaches' performance was assessed to estimate the most valid method to rescale DCE predicted values using the model fit (R2), Akaike Information Criteria (AIC), root mean squared error (RMSE), and mean absolute error (MAE).

RESULTS

A representative sample of 1376 Brazilian adults participated (DCE, 1152; cTTO, 211). The linear mapping without intercept (R2 = 96%; AIC, - 44; RMSE, 0.0803; MAE, - 0.0479) outperformed the non-linear without intercept (R2 = 98%; AIC, - 63; RMSE, 0.1385; MAE, - 0.1320). Utilities ranged from 1 (full health) to - 0.0059 (the worst health state). Highest weights were assigned to having pain or discomfort (pain/discomfort), followed by walking about (mobility), looking after myself (self-care), doing usual activities (usual activities), and feeling worried, sad, or unhappy (anxiety/depression).

CONCLUSION

This study elicited the Brazilian EQ-5D-Y-3L value set using a mixed-logit DCE model with a power parameter based on a linear mapping without intercept, which can be used to estimate the quality-adjusted life-years for economic evaluations of health technologies targeting the Brazilian youth population.

Who should value children's health and how? An international Delphi study

Valuing child health necessitates normative methodological decisions on whose preferences should be elicited and who should be imagined as experiencing impaired health. Formal guidance is limited and expert consensus unclear. This study sought to establish the degree of consensus among expert stakeholders on normative issues of who to ask and who should be imagined when valuing child health (7-17 years) to inform UK health technology assessment. Sixty-two experts (n = 47 in Round 2) from 18 countries participated in a modified, two-round online Delphi survey (Round 1: May-June 2023; Round 2: September-October 2023). Participants were expert stakeholders in child health valuation, including academics (n = 38); industry/consultancy representatives (including the charity/not-for-profit sector; n = 13); and UK policy/government representatives (n = 11). The Delphi survey was modified between rounds and consisted of 9-point Likert, categorical, multiple-choice, and free-text questions on normative issues in valuing child health. Responses were analysed descriptively and thematically. An a priori criterion of ≥75% agreement was established for formal consensus, while areas approaching consensus (≥70% agreement) and without consensus were identified as a future research primer. Consensus was observed that older adolescents (aged 16-17 years) and adults (18+ years) should be asked to value child health states. There was consensus that the former should think about themselves when valuing the health states and the latter should imagine a child of some form (e.g., imagining themselves as a child or another hypothetical child). However, no consensus was evident on what form this should take. Several other methodological issues also reached consensus. These findings are largely consistent with recent views elicited qualitatively from members of the public and other stakeholders on normative issues in valuing child health. The results mean that, contrary to what has been done in previous child health valuation studies, efforts should be made to involve both older adolescents (16+ years) and adults in child health valuation.

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.

A happiness approach to valuing health states for children

Preference weights are widely used to score generic health states into utility indexes for estimation of quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and to aid health care funding decisions. To date, health state utilities are predominantly derived using stated preference methods based on decision utility. This paper tests an alternative and generates preference weights using experienced utility for children based on the Child Health Utility 9D (CHU9D) descriptive system. We estimate the relative values of the CHU9D health states with regard to experienced utility, where experienced utility is approximated by self-reported happiness. A nationally-representative longitudinal survey was used including 6090 Australian children aged 12-17 years surveyed over 2014-2018. The derived weights were then applied to calculate the utility decrements for a few common child health conditions. We found that the estimated utility decrements are largely similar to those estimated using the published CHU9D Australian adolescent weights based on decision utility, except for pain and depression. A smaller utility decrement for pain and a larger utility decrement for depression were indicated by experienced utility. We contribute to the literature by showing that using experienced utility methods to generate preference weights for health states is possible, and we discuss some important methodological challenges for future studies such as the impracticability of anchoring to 'dead' when utilizing experienced utility.

Understanding Canadian stakeholders' views on measuring and valuing health for children and adolescents: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

Valuing child health is critical to assessing the value of healthcare interventions for children. However, there remain important methodological and normative issues. This qualitative study aimed to understand the views of Canadian stakeholders on these issues.

METHODS

Stakeholders from health technology assessment (HTA) agencies, pharmaceutical industry representatives, healthcare providers, and academic researchers/scholars were invited to attend an online interview. Semi-structured interviews were designed to focus on: (1) comparing the 3-level and 5-level versions of the EQ-5D-Y; (2) source of preferences for valuation (adults vs. children); (3) perspective of valuation tasks; and (4) methods for valuation (discrete choice experiment [DCE] and its variants versus time trade-off [TTO]). Participants were probed to consider HTA guidelines, cognitive capacity, and potential ethical concerns. All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Framework analysis with the incidence density method was used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Fifteen interviews were conducted between May and September 2022. 66.7% (N = 10) of participants had experience with economic evaluations, and 86.7% (N = 13) were parents. Eleven participants preferred the EQ-5D-Y-5L. 12 participants suggested that adolescents should be directly involved in child health valuation from their own perspective. The participants were split on the ethical concerns. Eight participants did not think that there was ethical concern. 11 participants preferred DCE to TTO. Among the DCE variants, 6 participants preferred the DCE with duration to the DCE with death.

CONCLUSIONS

Most Canadian stakeholders supported eliciting the preferences of adolescents directly from their own perspective for child health valuation. DCE was preferred if adolescents are directly involved.

Understanding UK public views on normative decisions made to value health-related quality of life in children: A qualitative study

Developing methodology for measuring and valuing child health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is a priority for health technology agencies. One aspect of this is normative decisions that are made in child HRQoL valuation. This qualitative study aimed to better understand adult public opinion on the normative questions of whose preferences to elicit (adults, children, or both) and from which perspective (who should be imagined living in impaired health), when valuing child HRQoL. Opinions of the adult UK public (N = 32) were solicited using online semi-structured focus groups, featuring a breadth of age, sex, ethnicities, and responsibility for children under 18 years. Participants were provided with bespoke informational material on health state valuation and were probed for their views. Arguments for and against different positions were discussed. Data was analysed using framework analysis. Participants demonstrated near-to-universal agreement that children should be involved in valuation in some form, yet this should differ depending on age or maturity. There was strong support for approaches combining involvement from children and adults (e.g., their parents), especially for younger children. There was little intuitive support for the 'taxpayer argument' for asking taxpaying adults. In the context of greater involvement of children in valuation, most participants supported using an 'own' perspective. Most participants thought that valuation study participants should know the exercise is about valuing child health states for ethical reasons. Informed views from the UK public on who should be asked and with what perspective when valuing child HRQoL appear to differ from normative positions previously advocated by some health economists, such as prioritising the preferences of taxpaying adults. In contrast, the results suggest including adults and children in valuation, with the proviso that the children are of an appropriate age and level of maturity, and that an own perspective is used wherever possible.

Testing 2 Alternative Time Trade-Off Methods for Valuation of Children's Health States

OBJECTIVES

Composite time trade-off (cTTO) values for EQ-5D-Y-3L health states tend to be high, raising concerns about sensitivity particularly for mild or moderate health states. We conceptualized and pilot tested 2 alternative time trade-off (TTO) variants: the caregiver TTO (CGTTO) and lag-time TTO (LTTO).

METHODS

We collected CGTTO and LTTO data in China for 10 EQ-5D-Y-3L health states and compared the resulting values, respondent feedback, and task completion times with those from an EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation study using cTTO. We also examined how age and parental status of respondents could affect TTO values.

RESULTS

A total of 304 participants were included in this study. Overall, cTTO showed statistically better results in all feedback questions. On a 5-point Likert scale where lower score means greater agreement, the mean (SD) feedback scores for cTTO, LTTO, and CGTTO were 1.18 (0.58), 1.45 (0.91), and 1.65 (1.02) for "easy to understand"; 1.45 (0.91), 1.94 (1.08), and 1.86 (1.24) for "easy to differentiate"; and 3.61 (1.29), 2.97 (1.33), and 3.02 (1.50) for "difficult to decide," respectively. The mean (SD) TTO values of all 10 states were 0.463 (0.494), 0.387 (0.555), and 0.123 (0.710) for cTTO, LTTO, and CGTTO, respectively. The effects of age and parental status on TTO values differed by the 3 methods.

CONCLUSIONS

LTTO and CGTTO produce values with good characteristics and merit further investigation. Researchers need to be aware of the differences in design and values when using the TTO method to value children's health states.

Can Independently Elicited Adult- and Child-Perspective Health-State Utilities Explain Priority Setting?

OBJECTIVES

Time trade-off (TTO) utilities for EQ-5D-Y-3L health states valued by adults taking a child's perspective are generally higher than their valuations of the same state for themselves. Ceteris paribus, the use of these utilities in economic evaluation implies that children gain less from treatments returning them to full health for a specified amount of time than adults. In this study, we explore if this implication affects individuals' views of priority-setting choices between treatments for adults and children.

METHODS

We elicited TTO utilities for 4 health states in online interviews, in which respondents valued states for a 10-year-old child and another adult their age. Views on priority setting were studied with person trade-off (PTO) tasks involving the same health states. We tested the ability of the subjects' TTO utilities to predict these societal choices in PTO.

RESULTS

There are no significant differences between adult and child health state valuations in our study, but we do observe a substantial preference for treating children over adults in the PTO task.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that perspective-dependent health-state utilities only explain a small part of views on priority setting between adults and children. External equity weights might be useful to better explain the higher priority given to children.

Eliciting preferences and respecting values: Why ask?

This essay explores the pitfalls and ambiguities in relying on preference elicitation to value health states, and it distinguishes preference elicitation, as a fallible method of measuring well-being, from public consultation, as an element of public deliberation. After distinguishing preference elicitation as a method of ascertaining opinions from preference elicitation as a method of measuring well-being, it points out that preferences depend on beliefs and the considerations speaking in favor of deferring to people's values do not carry over to deferring to their beliefs. Instead of valuing health states by their bearing on well-being, as measured by preferences, this essay argues for valuing health states by their bearing on activity limitations and suffering, as determined by public deliberation.

Time and lexicographic preferences in the valuation of EQ-5D-Y with time trade-off methodology

In the valuation of EQ-5D-Y-3L, adult respondents are asked to complete composite time trade-off (cTTO) tasks for a 10-year-old child. Earlier work has shown that cTTO utilities elicited in such a child perspective are generally higher than when adults take their own perspective. We explore how differences in time preference in child and adult perspectives could explain this effect. Furthermore, as cTTO valuation in a child perspective involves explicit consideration of immediate death for a child, we also consider how cTTO utilities could be affected by decision-makers lexicographically avoiding death in children. We report the results of an experiment in which 219 respondents valued 5 health states in both adult and child perspectives with either a standard cTTO or a lead-time TTO only approach, in which immediate death is less focal. Time preferences were measured in both perspectives. Our results suggest that utilities were lower when lead-time TTO, rather than cTTO, was used. We find large heterogeneity in time preference in both perspectives, with predominantly negative time preference. The influence of time preferences on utilities, however, was small, and correcting for time preferences did not reduce differences between utilities elicited in both perspectives. Surprisingly, we found more evidence for differences in utilities between adult and child perspectives when lead-time TTO was used. Overall, these results suggest that time and lexicographic preferences affect time trade-off valuation in child and adult perspectives, but are not the explanation for differences between these perspectives. We discuss the implications of our findings for EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation.

In a Child's Shoes: Composite Time Trade-Off Valuations for EQ-5D-Y-3L with Different Proxy Perspectives

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

EQ-5D-Y-3L health states are commonly valued by asking adults to complete stated preference tasks, 'given their views about a 10-year-old child' (hereafter referred to as proxy 1). The use of this perspective has been a source of debate. In this paper, we investigated an alternative proxy perspective: i.e. adults considered what they think a 10-year old-child would decide for itself (hereafter, proxy 2 (substitute)]. Our main objective was to explore how the outcomes, dispersion and response patterns of a composite time trade-off valuation differ between proxy 1 and proxy 2.

METHODS

A team of four trained interviewers completed 402 composite time trade-off interviews following the EQ-5D-Y-3L protocol. Respondents were randomly allocated to value health states in either the proxy 1 or proxy 2 (substitute) perspective. Each respondent valued ten health states with the perspective they were assigned to, as well as one health state with the alternative perspective (33333).

RESULTS

The use of different proxy perspectives yielded differences in EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation. For states in which children had considerable pain and were very worried, sad or unhappy, respondents' valuations were lower in proxy 1 than in proxy 2 (substitute) perspectives, by about 0.2. Within-subject variation across health states was lower for proxy 2 (substitute) than proxy 1 perspectives. Analyses of response patterns suggest that data for proxy 2 (substitute) perspectives were less clustered.

CONCLUSIONS

There are systematic differences between composite time trade-off responses given by adults deciding for children and adults considering what children would want for themselves. In addition to warranting further qualitative exploration, such differences contribute to the ongoing normative discussion surrounding the source and perspective used for valuation of child and adolescent health.

Value Set for the EQ-5D-Y-3L in Hungary

BACKGROUND

The Hungarian health technology assessment guidelines recommend the use of the EuroQol instrument family in quality-adjusted life-year calculations. However, no national value set exists for the EQ-5D-Y-3L or any other youth-specific instrument.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to develop a national value set of the EQ-5D-Y-3L for Hungary based on preferences of the general adult population.

METHODS

This study followed the international valuation protocol for the EQ-5D-Y-3L. Two independent samples, representative of the Hungarian general adult population in terms of age and sex were recruited to complete online discrete choice experiment (DCE) tasks and composite time trade-off (cTTO) tasks by computer-assisted personal interviews. Adults valued hypothetical EQ-5D-Y-3L health states considering the health of a 10-year-old child. DCE data were modelled using a mixed logit model with random-correlated coefficients. Latent DCE utility estimates were mapped onto mean observed cTTO utilities using ordinary least squares regression.

RESULTS

Overall, 996 and 200 respondents completed the DCE and cTTO surveys, respectively. For each domain, the value set resulted in larger utility decrements with more severe response levels. The relative importance of domains by level 3 coefficients was as follows: having pain or discomfort > feeling worried, sad or unhappy > mobility > doing usual activities > looking after myself. Overall, 12.3% of all health states had negative utilities in the value set, with the worst health state having the lowest predicted utility of - 0.485.

CONCLUSION

This study developed a national value set of the EQ-5D-Y-3L for Hungary. The value set enables to evaluate the cost utility of health technologies for children and adolescents based on societal preferences in Hungary.

Analytical Considerations When Anchoring Discrete Choice Experiment Values Using Composite Time Trade-Off Data: The Case of EQ-5D-Y-3L

Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are becoming increasingly used to elicit preferences for children's health states. However, DCE data need to be anchored to produce value sets, and composite time trade-off (cTTO) data are typically used in the context of EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation. The objective of this paper is to compare different anchoring methods, summarise the characteristics of the value sets they produce, and outline key considerations for analysts. Three anchoring methods were compared using data from published studies: (1) rescaling using the mean value for the worst health state; (2) linear mapping; and (3) hybrid modelling. The worst state rescaling value set had the largest range. The worst state rescaling and linear mapping value sets preserved the relative importance of the dimensions from the DCE, whereas the hybrid model value set did not. Overall, the predicted values from the hybrid model value set were more closely aligned with the cTTO values. These findings are relatively generalisable. Deciding upon which anchoring approach to use is challenging, as there are numerous considerations. Where cTTO data are collected for more than one health state, anchoring on the worst health state will arguably be suboptimal. However, the final choice of approach may require value judgements to be made. Researchers should seek input from relevant stakeholders when commencing valuation studies to help guide decisions and should clearly set out their rationale for their preferred anchoring approach in study outputs.

Findings from a Roundtable Discussion with US Stakeholders on Valuation of the EQ-5D-Y-3L

OBJECTIVES

The International Valuation Protocol for the valuation of the EQ-5D-Y-3L provides baseline guidance, but country-specific context is also important. This study aimed to obtain US stakeholders' input on key considerations for youth valuation in the US.

METHODS

A total of 14 stakeholders representing various backgrounds were identified via the investigators' networks. A 2-h online meeting was held to discuss (1) the need for a US value set for the EQ-5D-Y-3L; (2) willingness to pay more for quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gains for children versus adults; (3) sampling strategies; (4) framing perspectives; and (5) other challenges. The session was recorded, transcribed, and summarized.

RESULTS

Several stakeholders supported paying more for QALY gains for children in recognition of their potential future contributions to society, as well as to avoid potential undervaluation and promote access to innovative treatments. Concerns regarding possible double counting, lack of data to showcase long-term benefits, and dangers of paying more for certain subgroups were also expressed. Most of the stakeholders felt that adolescents could relate to a 10-year-old's perspective better than adults and were capable of self-completing valuation tasks, and thus should be directly included in the valuation study. There were concerns that adults would be inconsistent in their views about a 10-year-old, partly depending on their status as a parent.

CONCLUSIONS

US stakeholders provided insights relevant to youth valuation in a US context and were open to continued dialogue with investigators. This study could be useful to investigators who are conducting youth valuation studies in different countries and seeking stakeholder input.

Valuing EQ-5D-Y: the current state of play

BACKGROUND

For nearly a decade, value sets for the EQ-5D-Y were not available, reflecting challenges in valuing child HRQoL. A methodological research programme led to publication of a valuation protocol in 2020, which was rapidly taken up by local study teams. By the end of 2022, between 11 and 17 EQ-5D-Y value sets will be available, more than for any other child HRQoL measure. It is timely to review the experience of those using the protocol to identify early learnings and remaining issues where more research is needed.

METHODS

In June 2021, the EuroQol Group organised a three-day workshop, bringing together all those involved in EQ-5D-Y value set studies and related methodological research concerning EQ-5D-Y and valuation. Workshop discussions were captured by note taking and recording all sessions and online chat. A narrative summary of all sessions was produced and synthesised to identify points of agreement and aspects of methods where uncertainty remains.

RESULTS

There was broad agreement that DCE is working well as the principal valuation method. However, the most appropriate means of anchoring the latent scale values produced by DCE remains unclear. Some studies have deviated from the protocol by extending the number of states included in TTO tasks, to better support modelling of DCE and TTO. There is ongoing discussion about the relative merits of alternative variants of TTO and other methods for anchoring. Very few studies have consulted with local end-users to gauge the acceptability of methods used to value EQ-5D-Y.

CONCLUSIONS

Priority areas for research include testing alternative methods for anchoring DCE data; exploring the preferences of adolescents; and scale differences in values for EQ-5D-Y and adult EQ-5D states, and implications of such differences for the use of EQ-5D-Y values in HTA. Given the normative elements of the protocol, engaging with HTA bodies and other local users should be the first step for all future value set studies. Value sets undertaken to date are for the three-level EQ-5D-Y. However, the issues discussed in this paper are equally relevant to valuation of the five-level version of EQ-5D-Y; indeed, similar challenges are encountered valuing any measure of child HRQoL.

Why Do Adults Value EQ-5D-Y-3L Health States Differently for Themselves Than for Children and Adolescents: A Think-Aloud Study

OBJECTIVES

Following protocol, adults value EQ-5D-Y-3L health states from the perspective of a 10-year-old child. It remains unclear why adults value health states differently for themselves than for a 10-year-old child and whether the latter perspective is representative of adults' preferences for the 8 to 15 years age range of the EQ-5D-Y-3L. This study examines the reasons underlying (potential) differences in adults' health-state preferences for themselves, a 10-year-old child, and 15-year-old adolescent.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews using a think-aloud protocol with 25 participants who performed valuation tasks in July 2020 to August 2020. Using the Framework Method, we developed 28 categories grouped under 5 themes that illustrated the differences emerging from the interviews.

RESULTS

Participants (A) deemed it more straining to perform valuation tasks for a 10-year-old child and 15-year-old adolescent than for themselves, (B) had a stable self-image, but varied in whom they imagined as 10-year-old child and 15-year-old adolescent, (C) focused on different dimensions and levels for a 15-year-old adolescent than for a 10-year-old child and themselves, (D) had various thoughts about nonhealth-related factors that influenced their preferences, and (E) gave up relatively few life-years for a 10-year-old child and 15-year-old adolescent, also to avoid others bearing a grudge against them.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that differences in adults' health-state preferences for themselves and a 10-year-old child largely result from differences in thoughts about nonhealth-related factors. They further indicate that health-state preferences for a 10-year-old child may not be representative of such preferences for the full EQ-5D-Y-3L age range.

Does Changing the Age of a Child to be Considered in 3-Level Version of EQ-5D-Y Discrete Choice Experiment-Based Valuation Studies Affect Health Preferences?

OBJECTIVES

There has been some debate about the choice of perspective and the age of the child considered when completing preference elicitation tasks in the 3-level version of EQ-5D-Y (EQ-5D-Y-3L) valuation protocol. This study aimed to clarify the impact on latent scale EQ-5D-Y-3L values of varying the age of the child experiencing the health state considered by respondents completing the discrete choice experiment (DCE) tasks of the protocol.

METHODS

We conducted an online DCE with a representative sample of 1000 adults in the United Kingdom and 1000 adults in the United States. Respondents selected the health state they prefer from a series of DCE paired EQ-5D-Y-3L health state comparisons using their own perspective and that of a hypothetical child from the following age groups: "5-7 years old," "8-10 years old," "11-13 years old," and "14-15 years old." Data analysis was conducted using separate multinomial logit models for each perspective and country. We also estimated combined models including data from each possible pair of perspectives and used interactions between EQ-5D-Y-3L levels and perspective to determine whether any differences were statistically significant.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences in coefficients between perspectives were found in the United States. In the United Kingdom, there were differences between the own perspective and the 5 to 7 years old perspective (looking after myself level 3) and between the 5 to 7 years old perspective and the 8 to 10 years old perspective (usual activities level 3).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that there is minimal impact on latent scale values when using different ages of the hypothetical child in the current EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation protocol.

Exploring the Issues of Valuing Child and Adolescent Health States Using a Mixed Sample of Adolescents and Adults

Preferences for child and adolescent health states used to generate health state utility values can be elicited from adults, young adults, adolescents, or combinations of these. This commentary paper provides a critical overview of issues and implications arising from valuing child and adolescent health states using a novel approach of a mixed sample of adolescents and adults. The commentary is informed by critical analysis of normative, ethical, practical and theoretical arguments in the health state valuation literature. Discussion focusses upon adolescent empowerment, understanding and psychosocial maturity; ethical concerns; elicitation tasks; perspective; and selection of sample proportions across adolescents and adults. It is argued that valuation of child and adolescent health states by both adolescents and adults could involve all participants completing the same preference elicitation task using the same perspective (e.g. time trade-off imagining they are living in the health state), and all preferences being modelled to generate a combined value set that reflects both adolescent and adult preferences. It is concluded that the valuation of child and adolescent health states by a mixed adolescent and adult sample appears feasible and has the advantage that it includes some of the population who can potentially experience the health states, thus enabling adolescents to express their views around matters that may affect them, and the population that are taxpayers and voters. However, both the relative proportion of adults and adolescents to include in a valuation sample and the elicitation technique require careful consideration.

Exploring EQ-5D-Y-3L Experience-Based VAS Values Derived Among Adolescents

OBJECTIVES

The EQ-5D-Y-3L is a generic health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instrument, developed from the adult version to be suitable for children and adolescents aged 8-15 years. To derive values for the EQ-5D-Y-3L different valuation methods and perspectives have been applied. The aim of this study was to explore EQ-5D-Y-3L experience-based visual analogue scale (VAS) values derived among adolescents.

METHODS

Data were derived from a cross-sectional population survey administered via schools in 2014 to adolescents aged 13-18 years, in Sweden. Regression analyses were performed on individual data with the VAS value as dependent variable. Ordinary least-squares (OLS) and generalised linear models (GLM) were estimated with two dummy variables for each of the EQ-5D-Y-3L dimensions. Interaction variables were tested. One way of anchoring VAS at dead and full health by using the predicted values for worst and best health states defined by the EQ-5D-Y-3L descriptive system was explored.

RESULTS

Of the 243 possible health states in EQ-5D-Y-3L, 92 were reported by the 6,468 respondents. The largest decrements in VAS values were observed for the dimension 'feeling worried, sad or unhappy' followed by 'doing usual activities'. All models performed similarly in terms of monotonicity and goodness of fit but in terms of simplicity and understandability, the OLS main effect model was superior.

CONCLUSIONS

We have explored experience-based VAS values for the EQ-5D-Y-3L derived among adolescents. The findings suggest that it is possible for adolescents to value their own health state using the VAS, which makes it possible to capture aspects that are important for young people.

'Like holding the axe on who should live or not': adolescents' and adults' perceptions of valuing children's health states using a standardised valuation protocol for the EQ-5D-Y-3L

Purpose

There is an increasing interest for using qualitative methods to investigate peoples’ cognitive process when asked to value health states. A standardised valuation protocol for the EQ-5D-Y-3L instrument was recently developed. Little is known regarding how people think, reason, and feel when asked to value health states for children. The aim was to explore how adolescents and adults perceive the task of valuing children’s health states using the standardised valuation protocol.

Methods

This was a qualitative study where adults (n = 10) and adolescents (n = 10) from the general population participated in individual video-interviews. Initially, participants reported their own health with the EQ-5D-3L instrument. Then they were asked to complete several valuations tasks for a 10-year-old child according to the standardised valuation protocol, followed by a semi-structured interview with open-ended questions to further explore participants’ perceptions. A qualitative content analysis was performed.

Results

The two main categories that emerged from the data were ‘Thoughts and feelings when valuing children’s health states’ and ‘Strategies when valuing children’s health states’. Participants expressed feeling doubt, awfulness and being reluctant to trade-off life years, and questioned who has the right to value health states for children. Experience and point of view were strategies participants used to complete the valuation tasks.

Conclusion

The findings from the present study can contribute to the understanding and interpretation of quantitative results where the standardised valuation protocol has been used to derive values for the EQ-5D-Y-3L. Furthermore, results of the study support the feasibility of including adolescents in valuation studies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11136-022-03107-0.

Expect Nothing: The (Lack of) Influence of Subjective Life Expectancy on Valuation of Child Health States

Objective

Earlier research has shown that individuals' subjective life expectancy (SLE) affects health state valuation with time trade-off (TTO). Individuals with longer expected life durations are less willing to trade-off life duration, which yields higher utilities. In this article, the influence of SLE is explored in the valuation of EQ-5D-Y-3L with a proxy perspective, i.e., adults' valuation of health states considering the life of a 10-year-old child. As SLE for children is likely higher, this might explain earlier findings suggesting that individuals are less willing to trade-off years of life for children than for adults.

Methods

A total of 197 respondents were recruited to take part in digital TTO interviews, facilitated by trained interviewers. TTO interviews were implemented in accordance with the recommended protocol for the valuation of EQ-5D-Y-3L. Respondents valued 10 EQ-5D-Y-3L health states for a 10-year-old child, after which they were asked to report how old they themselves expected to become and also how old they expected a 10-year-old child to become.

Results

Generally, adult respondents reported higher SLE for children than for themselves. Neither SLE was systematically associated with the willingness to trade lifetime or the number of life years traded off in TTO tasks. This null-result was substantiated by regression analyses per health state.

Conclusion

The results of this study suggest that individuals' expectations about longevity are not associated with EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation. This lack of association is in contrast to earlier work and might be explained by the psychological distance introduced with proxy perspective valuation, or by the methodological differences with earlier work.

Non-disease specific patient-reported outcome measures of health-related quality of life in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a systematic review of current research and practice

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), as a chronic condition, is associated with symptoms negatively impacting health-related quality of life (HRQL). Regarding growing interest in the implementation of the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), we aimed to review the non-disease specific PROMs addressing HRQL assessment, potentially useful in the clinical care of JIA and daily practice. A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE/PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus and Embase databases (1990 to 2021), with a focus on the recent 5-years period. Entry keywords included the terms: “children”, “adolescents”, “JIA”, “chronic diseases”, “HRQL”, “PROMs” and wordings for the specific tools. Several available PROMs intended to measure HRQL, non-specific to JIA, were identified. The presented outcomes differed in psychometric properties, yet all were feasible in assessing HRQL in healthy children and those with chronic diseases. Both EQ-5D-Y and PedsQL have already been tested in JIA, showing relevant reliability, validity, and similar efficiency as disease-specific measurements. For PROMIS® PGH-7 and PGH-7 + 2, such validation and cross-cultural adaptation need to be performed. Considering the future directions in pediatric rheumatology, the large-scale implementation of PROMIS® PGH-7 and PGH-7 + 2 in JIA offers a particularly valuable opportunity. The PROMs reflect the patient perception of the chronic disease and allow to understand child’s opinions. The PROMs may provide an important element of the holistic medical care of patients with JIA and a standardized tool for clinical outcomes, monitoring disease severity and response to treatment.

Self vs. other, child vs. adult. An experimental comparison of valuation perspectives for valuation of EQ-5D-Y-3L health states

OBJECTIVES

EQ-5D-Y-3L health states are valued by adults taking the perspective of a 10-year-old child. Compared to valuation of adult EQ-5D instruments, this entails two changes to the perspective: (i) child health states are valued instead of adult health states and: (ii) health states are valued for someone else instead of for oneself. Although earlier work has shown that these combined changes yield different values for child and adult health states that are otherwise equal, it currently remains unclear why. Hence, we aimed to disentangle the effects of both changes.

METHODS

A sample of 205 students (mean age: 19.48) was surveyed. Each respondent completed visual analogue scale (VAS) and time trade-off (TTO) tasks for five EQ-5D-Y-3L states, using four randomly ordered perspectives: (i) self-adult (themselves), (ii) other-adult (someone their age), (iii) self-child (themselves as a 10-year-old), (iv) other-child (a child of 10 years old). We compared how each perspective impacted outcomes, precision and quality of EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation.

RESULTS

Overall, differences between perspectives were consistent, with their direction being dependent on the health states and respondents. For VAS, the effect on outcomes of valuation depended on severity, but variance was higher in valuation with child perspectives. For TTO, we observed that EQ-5D-Y-3L states valued on behalf of others (i.e., children or adults) received higher valuations, but lower variances.

CONCLUSION

The use of a different perspective appears to yield systematic differences in EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation, with considerable heterogeneity between health states and respondents. This may explain mixed findings in earlier work.

Valuing child and adolescent health: a qualitative study on different perspectives and priorities taken by the adult general public

BACKGROUND

Quantitative health preference research has shown that different "perspectives", defined here as who is imagined to be experiencing particular health states, impact stated preferences. This qualitative project aimed to elucidate this phenomenon, within the context of adults' valuation of child and adolescent health states.

METHODS

Six focus groups with 30 members of the UK adult public were conducted between December 2019 and February 2020 and analysed using framework analysis. Each focus group had two stages. First, participants individually completed time trade-off tasks and a pairwise task (mirroring a discrete choice experiment without duration) for two EQ-5D-Y health states, assuming a series of perspectives: (a) themselves at current age; (b) another adult; (c) 10-year old child; (d) themselves as a 10-year old child. Second, a semi-structured discussion explored their responses.

RESULTS

Participants' views were often heterogeneous, with some common themes. Qualitatively, participants expressed a different willingness to trade-off life years for a 10-year old child versus themselves or another adult, and this differed by the health profile and child imagined. The same health states were often viewed as having a different impact on utility for a 10-year old child than adults. Imagining a 10-year old child is difficult and there is variation in who is imagined. Participants found answering based on their own-adult perspective most acceptable. There were no strong preferences for prioritising child health over working-age adults' health.

CONCLUSIONS

If an adult sample is used to value child- and adolescent-specific health states it is important to consider the perspective employed. Members of the adult public provide different responses when different perspectives are used due to differences in the perceived impact of the same health states. If adults are asked to imagine a child, we recommend that sampling is representative for parental status, since this can affect preferences.