ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2023
Time and lexicographic preferences in the valuation of EQ-5D-Y with time trade-off methodology.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- How do Health State Values Differ When Respondents Consider Adults Versus Children Living in Those States? A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Is episodic future thinking effective in mitigating the influence of time preference in time trade-off?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025Trial
- Making Composite Time Trade-Off Sensitive for Worse-than-Dead Health States.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Trial
- Eliciting discounting model and direction at the individual level with time trade-off follow-up questions.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Child- versus adult-perspective composite time trade-off valuations for the EQ-5D-Y-3L: evidence from the Hungarian valuation study.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- EQ-5D(-Y) Valuation from Adult and Child Perspectives: Where Does the Empirical Evidence Leave Us and How Should We Proceed?PharmacoEconomics · 2026Review
- Nothing about us, without us? A reflection on and call for involving children in the process of valuing child health.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Loss aversion in EQ-5D-Y-3L: does it explain differences in willingness to trade-off life years in adults and children?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025Article
- Comparing heuristic valuation processes between health state valuation from child and adult perspectives.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024Article
- The effect of duration and time preference on the gap between adult and child health state valuations in time trade-off.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024Article
- Article
- Using Age-Specific Values for Pediatric HRQoL in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Is There a Problem to Be Solved? If So, How?PharmacoEconomics · 2023Article
- Estimating an EQ-5D-Y-3L Value Set for China.PharmacoEconomics · 2022Article
- In a Child's Shoes: Composite Time Trade-Off Valuations for EQ-5D-Y-3L with Different Proxy Perspectives.PharmacoEconomics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.