Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37879694›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2023

Child health valuation protocol for a discrete choice experiment comparing paired comparison and kaizen tasks and estimating US EQ-5D-Y-3L values on an experience scale.

Maksat Jumamyradov, Benjamin Matthew Craig, Oliver Rivero-Arias, Michał Jakubczyk

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A direct comparison of the measurement properties of the PROMIS-16 and EQ-5D-5L in the U.S. general population.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

Maksat JumamyradovDepartment of Economics, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA.
Benjamin Matthew CraigDepartment of Economics, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA bcraig@usf.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-1121-1316
Oliver Rivero-AriasNuffield Department of Population Health, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2233-6544
Michał JakubczykDivision of Decision Analysis and Support, SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Warsaw, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA decade ago, the first national valuation study of the EQ-5D-Y-3L (Y-3L) involved a discrete choice experiment (DCE) that asked 4155 US adult respondents to complete 40 paired comparisons, choosing between two dying children. Instead of choosing between dying children, the respondents in this novel protocol are asked whether 'being in a coma' is better or worse than experiencing 'health problems' (ie, experience scale) and how they would relieve health problems (ie, kaizen tasks). Our aims are to compare the preference evidence of the paired comparison and kaizen tasks and to conduct a DCE for the valuation of Y-3L profiles on an experience scale. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Under this protocol, we will conduct an online survey that collects preference evidence from 600 US adult respondents on the health of a 10-year-old child for a week. Across all scenarios, each child will be described as either being 'in a coma' or having 'health problems', namely five three-level attributes (Y-3L). In this DCE, each respondent will be randomly assigned to one of four D-efficient blocks, including five coma comparisons (ie, Y-3L vs coma), 10 paired comparisons (Y-3L vs Y-3L) and 10 kaizen tasks (preference paths). In addition to comparing evidence by task (aim 2), the analysis plan includes the estimation of main-effects conditional logit models to create a Y-3L value set on an 'experience scale' where positive (negative) experiences have positive (negative) values (0 is 'being in a coma' and 1 is full health). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The institutional review board (IRB) (Advarra) determined that this project (Pro00072276) is exempt from IRB oversight based on DHHS 45 CFR 46.104(d)(2) and is not subject to requirements for continuing review. The results will be prepared for publication in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings. The data and code will be made available on reasonable request.

Indexed as

Child HealthHealth StatusChildComaHumansMatched-Pair AnalysisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurveys and QuestionnairesHEALTH ECONOMICSPAEDIATRICSPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresProtocols & guidelinesQuality of LifeSTATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS

Identifiers

PMID37879694
PMCPMC10603523

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.