Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37439998›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics2023

Using Age-Specific Values for Pediatric HRQoL in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Is There a Problem to Be Solved? If So, How?

Nancy J Devlin, Tianxin Pan, Mark Sculpher, Mark Jit, Elly Stolk, Donna Rowen, Barend van Hout, Richard Norman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Eliciting health state utilities for open wounds in dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  5. Measuring health-related quality of life in infants and toddlers: conceptual challenges and proposed recommendations.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  6. Valuation of the EQ-5D-Y-5L Using DCE Methods That Account for Nonlinear Time Preferences.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026
    Article
  7. Do EQ-5D-Y-3L value sets have common properties, and how do they compare to EQ-5D-5L value sets?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. 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 · 2026
    Article
  11. Valuing health states for infants and toddlers: challenges and methodological considerations in EQ-TIPS preference elicitation.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  12. Review
  13. 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 · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. An Australian Value Set for the EQ-5D-Y-3L.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
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

8 authors.

Nancy J DevlinHealth Economics Unit, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, 207 Bouverie St, Melbourne, VIC, 3010, Australia. nancy.devlin@unimelb.edu.au.
Tianxin PanHealth Economics Unit, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, 207 Bouverie St, Melbourne, VIC, 3010, Australia.
Mark SculpherCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.
Mark JitDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Elly StolkEuroQol Research Foundation, Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Donna RowenSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Barend van HoutSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Richard NormanSchool of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Value sets for the EQ-5D-Y-3L published to date appear to have distinctive characteristics compared with value sets for corresponding adult instruments: in many cases, the value for the worst health state is higher and there are fewer values < 0. The aim of this paper is to consider how and why values for child and adult health differ; and what the implications of that are for the use of EQ-5D-Y-3L values in economic evaluations to inform healthcare resource allocation decisions. We posit four potential explanations for the differences in values: (a) The wording of severity labels may mean the worst problems on the EQ-5D-Y-3L are descriptively less severe than those on the EQ-5D-5L; (b) Adults may genuinely consider that children are less badly affected than adults by descriptively similar health issues. That is, for any given health problem, adult respondents in valuation studies consider children's overall health-related quality of life (HRQoL) on average to be higher than that for adults; (c) Values are being sought by eliciting adults' stated preferences for HRQoL in another person, rather than in themselves (regardless of whether the 'other person' concerned is a child); and (d) The need to elicit preferences for child HRQoL that are anchored at dead = 0 invokes special considerations regarding children's survival. Existing evidence does not rule out the possibility that (c) and (d) exert an upward bias in values. We consider the implications of that for the interpretation and use of values for pediatric HRQoL. Alternative methods for valuing children's HRQoL in a manner that is not 'age specific' are possible and may help to avoid issues of non-comparability. Use of these methods would place the onus on health technology assessment bodies to reflect any special considerations regarding child quality-adjusted life-year gains.

Indexed as

Health StatusQuality of LifeAdultAge FactorsChildCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID37439998
PMCPMC10492668

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.