ArticlePharmacoEconomics2024
Comparing the Psychometric Performance of Generic Paediatric Health-Related Quality of Life Instruments in Children and Adolescents with ADHD, Anxiety and/or Depression.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2024. 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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Measurement Properties of the EQ-5D Instruments in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Pooled it
- Comparative performance of common paediatric patient-reported outcome measures (P-PROMs) across health conditions.Archives of disease in childhood · 2026Article
- Responsiveness of the EQ-5D-Y-5L Parent-Proxy Version Among Children with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis.The patient · 2026Article
- Measuring quality of life in autistic children and young people: comparing the performance of common generic health related quality of life instruments.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Psychometric properties comparison of EQ-5D-Y-3L and CHU9D in children and adolescents across different BMI classifications in Jiangsu, China.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Beyond health: a systematic review of cross-sector economic implications of school-based mental health programmes in Europe.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Validity evidence for the use of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory, the Revised Children's Anxiety and Depression Scale-25, and the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale in measurement-based care in intensive outpatient child and adolescent mental health care.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Article
- Meeting the Challenges of Preference-Weighted Health-Related Quality-of-Life Measurement in Children.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to examine the validity, reliability and responsiveness of common generic paediatric health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments in children and adolescents with mental health challenges.
methodsParticipants were a subset of the Australian Paediatric Multi-Instrument Comparison (P-MIC) study and comprised 1013 children aged 4-18 years with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (n = 533), or anxiety and/or depression (n = 480). Participants completed an online survey including a range of generic paediatric HRQoL instruments (PedsQL, EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, CHU9D) and mental health symptom measures (SDQ, SWAN, RCADS-25). A subset of participants also completed the HUI3 and AQoL-6D. The psychometric performance of each HRQoL instrument was assessed regarding acceptability/feasibility; floor/ceiling effects; convergent validity; known-group validity; responsiveness and test-retest reliability.
resultsThe PedsQL, CHU9D, EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L showed similarly good performance for acceptability/feasibility, known-group validity and convergent validity. The CHU9D and PedsQL showed no floor or ceiling effects and fair-good test-retest reliability. Test-retest reliability was lower for the EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L. The EQ-5D-Y-3L showed the highest ceiling effects, but was the top performing instrument alongside the CHU9D on responsiveness to improvements in health status, followed by the PedsQL. The AQoL-6D and HUI3 showed good acceptability/feasibility, no floor or ceiling effects, and good convergent validity, yet poorer performance on known-group validity. Responsiveness and test-retest reliability were not able to be assessed for these two instruments. In subgroup analyses, performance was similar for all instruments for acceptability/feasibility, known-group and convergent validity, however, relative strengths and weaknesses for each instrument were noted for ceiling effects, responsiveness and test-retest reliability. In sensitivity analyses using utility scores, performance regarding known-group and convergent validity worsened slightly for the EQ-5D-Y-3L and CHU9D, though improved slightly for the HUI3 and AQoL-6D.
conclusionsWhile each instrument showed strong performance in some areas, careful consideration of the choice of instrument is advised, as this may differ dependent on the intended use of the instrument, and the age, gender and type of mental health condition of the population in which the instrument is being used.
trial registrationANZCTR-ACTRN12621000657820.
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.