ArticleBMJ open2025
Exploring the feasibility of using discrete choice experiment (DCE) to elicit preferences among children and adolescents: protocol for a convergent parallel mixed methods study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Eliciting and Anchoring Health State Preferences Using Discrete Choice Experiments Among Adults, Adolescents, and Children.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDiscrete choice experiments (DCEs) are increasingly used to elicit value sets for paediatric health-related quality of life instruments, including the EQ-5D-Y. In a multinational pilot study that compared EQ-5D-Y-5L health state preferences among children, adolescents and adults, more inconsistencies in DCE responses were observed among children and adolescents than adults. Possible explanations for inconsistencies could be youths' limited understanding of health state preferences or lack of engagement with the online survey. This protocol describes the methods of a study that explores the feasibility of eliciting health state preferences for the EQ-5D-Y-5L from Canadian children and adolescents using DCE. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A convergent parallel mixed methods study will be conducted with a purposive, stratified sample of 36 Canadian children and adolescents (13-18 years). In the quantitative study component, participants will complete an online questionnaire with EQ-5D-Y-5L and DCE exercises. The quantitative data on participants' sociodemographic characteristics, EQ-5D-Y-5L, and feasibility indicators of DCE (ie, incompletion, speeding, flatlining, violation of dominant choice task) will be analysed using descriptive statistics. The second component will be a qualitative focus group discussion to understand their experiences of completing the DCE tasks. Six focus groups (with six participants per group) will be conducted. The qualitative data will be analysed using content analysis. The findings from both components will then be integrated using narrative synthesis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board (#17034). We will publish findings in peer-reviewed journals and present at key conferences. We will also disseminate results within the EuroQol community as the study findings are part of a methodological research programme aimed at informing the design of an EQ-5D-Y-5L valuation study in Canada.
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.