ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2025
Comparing the measurement properties of the EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L and CHU9D in children and adolescents: a measurement property study.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mapping the NEI-VFQ-25 scores to the EQ-5D-Y-3L and CHU-9D utility values among adolescents with myopia.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L and Child Health Utility 9-dimension (CHU9D) are instruments that measures health-related quality of life. These instruments are widely used in children and adolescents with health conditions, however the measurement properties of the three instruments have not been tested in Brazilian children.
objectiveTo compare and test the measurement properties of the EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L and CHU9D in Brazilian children and adolescents with and without any self-reported musculoskeletal pain.
methodsChildren and adolescents aged 8-18 years were recruited from schools in Sao Paulo, Brazil and, self-completed the EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L and CHU9D at baseline and after 7 days. Reliability was determined by Kappa for the dimensions and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for visual analogue scale (EQ VAS). Hypothesis were developed for construct validity and tested with Spearman and Pearson correlations (adequate if > 75% of the hypotheses confirmed). Children and adolescents with and without musculoskeletal pain were compared for known-group validity.
resultsWe included 356 children and adolescents, with 51% (n = 181) reporting musculoskeletal pain. Majority were male (53%) and mean age of 11.5 years (SD: 2.9). The EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L and CHU9D ranged from poor to moderate reliability. Reliability of the EQ VAS was substantial (ICC: 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72 to 0.87) to moderate (ICC: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.53) for those with musculoskeletal pain and without pain, respectively. In those with musculoskeletal pain the association was weak to moderate, with > 75% of hypotheses confirmed, when comparing EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-D-Y-5L with the PedsQL™ and comparing EQ-5D-Y-5L with CHU9D. All instruments were able to discriminate those with and without musculoskeletal pain.
conclusionAll instruments had better measurement properties in children and adolescents with musculoskeletal pain, compared to those without for reliability and construct validity. These instruments could be used to assess health-related quality of life in Brazilian children and adolescents with musculoskeletal pain.
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.