Accounting for the Opportunity Cost of Children's Time in Economic Evaluation: Challenges and Frequently Asked Questions.

Lazaros Andronis, Cameron Morgan, Cam Donaldson, Emily Lancsar, Stavros Petrou

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Health economics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Lazaros AndronisCentre for Health Economics at Warwick, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7998-7431

Cameron MorganCentre for Health Economics at Warwick, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

Cam DonaldsonYunus Centre for Social Business and Health, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.

Emily LancsarNational Centre for Epidemiology & Public Health, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.

Stavros PetrouNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Economic evaluations carried out from a societal perspective ought to account for the opportunity cost of a range of resources, including those committed by care recipients. People's time is such a resource: it is limited, valuable and it has an opportunity cost that should be reflected in cost calculations. Yet, when it comes to children and young people (CYP), there are few suggestions on how to value their time and include it in economic evaluations. Despite repeated calls for research, this remains a persistent gap in our methodology "playbook". In this paper, we look at the topic by bringing together seminal literature and recent research findings. We discuss key uncertainties that need to be resolved for the topic to move forwards, outline challenges and "frequently asked questions", offer our views on possible answers and solutions, and sketch out a roadmap for future research.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisAdolescentChildHumansTime Factorschildren and young peoplemonetary valuationtime inputs

Identifiers

PMID41807967

DOI10.1002/hec.70089

PMCPMC13126095

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

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.