Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25890377›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2015

The validity of the Child Health Utility instrument (CHU9D) as a routine outcome measure for use in child and adolescent mental health services.

Gareth Furber, Leonie Segal

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 81 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
81citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
14.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

81 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 125 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A systematic review of health state utility values and psychometric performance of generic preference-based instruments for children and adolescents with mental health problems.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Mapping PedsQL™ scores to CHU9D utility weights for children with chronic conditions in a multi-ethnic and deprived metropolitan population.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Article
  20. Article

21 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gareth FurberHealth Economics and Social Policy Group, School of Population Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia. gareth.furber@unisa.edu.au.
Leonie SegalHealth Economics and Social Policy Group, School of Population Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia. leonie.segal@unisa.edu.au.
University of South Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFew cost-utility studies of child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) use quality adjusted life years (a combination of utility weights and time in health state) as the outcome to enable comparison across disparate programs and modalities. Part of the solution to this problem involves embedding preference-based health-related quality of life (PBHRQOL) utility instruments, which generate utility weights, in clinical practice and research. The Child Health Utility (CHU9D) is a generic PBHRQOL instrument developed specifically for use in young people. The purpose of this study was to assess the suitability of the CHU9D as a routine outcome measure in CAMHS clinical practice.

methodsTwo hundred caregivers of children receiving community mental health services completed the CHU9D alongside a standardised child and adolescent mental health measure (the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire - SDQ) during a telephone interview. We investigated face validity, practicality, internal consistency, and convergent validity of the CHU9D. In addition, we compared the utility weights obtained in this group with utility weights from other studies of child and adolescent mental health populations.

resultsParticipants found the CHU9D easy and quick to complete. It demonstrated acceptable internal consistency, and correlated moderately with the SDQ. It was able to discriminate between children in the abnormal range and those in the non-clinical/borderline range as measured by the SDQ. Three CHU9D items without corollaries in the SDQ (sleep, schoolwork, daily routine) were found to be significant predictors of the SDQ total score and may be useful clinical metrics. The mean utility weight of this sample was comparable with clinical subsamples from other CHU9D studies, but was significantly higher than mean utility weights noted in other child and adolescent mental health samples.

conclusionsInitial validation suggests further investigation of the CHU9D as a routine outcome measure in CAMHS is warranted. Further investigation should explore test-retest reliability, sensitivity to change, concordance between caregiver and child-completed forms, and the calibration of the utility weights. Differences between utility weights generated by the CHU9D and other utility instruments in this population should be further examined by administering a range of PBHRQOL instruments concurrently in a mental health group.

Indexed as

Health Status IndicatorsQuality-Adjusted Life YearsAdolescentChildChild WelfareFemaleHumansMaleMental HealthMental Health ServicesOutcome Assessment, Health CareReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID25890377
PMCPMC4340862
OpenAlexW2107015619

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.