IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v355y2024ics027795362400580x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who should value children's health and how? An international Delphi study

Author

Listed:
  • Powell, Philip A.
  • Rowen, Donna
  • Keetharuth, Anju
  • Mukuria, Clara
  • Shah, Koonal

Abstract

Valuing child health necessitates normative methodological decisions on whose preferences should be elicited and who should be imagined as experiencing impaired health. Formal guidance is limited and expert consensus unclear. This study sought to establish the degree of consensus among expert stakeholders on normative issues of who to ask and who should be imagined when valuing child health (7–17 years) to inform UK health technology assessment. Sixty-two experts (n = 47 in Round 2) from 18 countries participated in a modified, two-round online Delphi survey (Round 1: May-June 2023; Round 2: September-October 2023). Participants were expert stakeholders in child health valuation, including academics (n = 38); industry/consultancy representatives (including the charity/not-for-profit sector; n = 13); and UK policy/government representatives (n = 11). The Delphi survey was modified between rounds and consisted of 9-point Likert, categorical, multiple-choice, and free-text questions on normative issues in valuing child health. Responses were analysed descriptively and thematically. An a priori criterion of ≥75% agreement was established for formal consensus, while areas approaching consensus (≥70% agreement) and without consensus were identified as a future research primer. Consensus was observed that older adolescents (aged 16–17 years) and adults (18+ years) should be asked to value child health states. There was consensus that the former should think about themselves when valuing the health states and the latter should imagine a child of some form (e.g., imagining themselves as a child or another hypothetical child). However, no consensus was evident on what form this should take. Several other methodological issues also reached consensus. These findings are largely consistent with recent views elicited qualitatively from members of the public and other stakeholders on normative issues in valuing child health. The results mean that, contrary to what has been done in previous child health valuation studies, efforts should be made to involve both older adolescents (16+ years) and adults in child health valuation.

Suggested Citation

  • Powell, Philip A. & Rowen, Donna & Keetharuth, Anju & Mukuria, Clara & Shah, Koonal, 2024. "Who should value children's health and how? An international Delphi study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 355(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:355:y:2024:i:c:s027795362400580x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117127
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027795362400580X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117127?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brazier, John & Ratcliffe, Julie & Salomon, Joshua & Tsuchiya, Aki, 2016. "Measuring and Valuing Health Benefits for Economic Evaluation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780198725923.
    2. Joseph Kwon & Louise Freijser & Elisabeth Huynh & Martin Howell & Gang Chen & Kamran Khan & Shahd Daher & Nia Roberts & Conrad Harrison & Sarah Smith & Nancy Devlin & Kirsten Howard & Emily Lancsar & , 2022. "Correction to: Systematic Review of Conceptual, Age, Measurement and Valuation Considerations for Generic Multidimensional Childhood Patient-Reported Outcome Measures," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 477-478, April.
    3. David J. Mott & Nancy J. Devlin & Simone Kreimeier & Richard Norman & Koonal K. Shah & Oliver Rivero-Arias, 2022. "Analytical Considerations When Anchoring Discrete Choice Experiment Values Using Composite Time Trade-Off Data: The Case of EQ-5D-Y-3L," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 129-137, December.
    4. Khadka, Jyoti & Kwon, Joseph & Petrou, Stavros & Lancsar, Emily & Ratcliffe, Julie, 2019. "Mind the (inter-rater) gap. An investigation of self-reported versus proxy-reported assessments in the derivation of childhood utility values for economic evaluation: A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    5. Donna Rowen & Oliver Rivero-Arias & Nancy Devlin & Julie Ratcliffe, 2020. "Review of Valuation Methods of Preference-Based Measures of Health for Economic Evaluation in Child and Adolescent Populations: Where are We Now and Where are We Going?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 325-340, April.
    6. Valentina Prevolnik Rupel & Marko Ogorevc, 2021. "EQ-5D-Y Value Set for Slovenia," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(4), pages 463-471, April.
    7. Jonathan L. Nazari & A. Simon Pickard & Ning Yan Gu, 2022. "Findings from a Roundtable Discussion with US Stakeholders on Valuation of the EQ-5D-Y-3L," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 139-146, December.
    8. Titi Sahidah Fitriana & Bram Roudijk & Fredrick Dermawan Purba & Jan J. V. Busschbach & Elly Stolk, 2022. "Estimating an EQ-5D-Y-3L Value Set for Indonesia by Mapping the DCE onto TTO Values," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 157-167, December.
    9. Fanni Rencz & Gábor Ruzsa & Alex Bató & Zhihao Yang & Aureliano Paolo Finch & Valentin Brodszky, 2022. "Value Set for the EQ-5D-Y-3L in Hungary," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 205-215, December.
    10. Juan M. Ramos-Goñi & Mark Oppe & Elly Stolk & Koonal Shah & Simone Kreimeier & Oliver Rivero-Arias & Nancy Devlin, 2020. "International Valuation Protocol for the EQ-5D-Y-3L," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(7), pages 653-663, July.
    11. Sarah Dewilde & Bram Roudijk & Nafthali H. Tollenaar & Juan M. Ramos-Goñi, 2022. "An EQ-5D-Y-3L Value Set for Belgium," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 169-180, December.
    12. Simone Kreimeier & David Mott & Kristina Ludwig & Wolfgang Greiner, 2022. "EQ-5D-Y Value Set for Germany," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 217-229, December.
    13. S. A. Lipman & V. T. Reckers-Droog & M. Karimi & M. Jakubczyk & A. E. Attema, 2021. "Self vs. other, child vs. adult. An experimental comparison of valuation perspectives for valuation of EQ-5D-Y-3L health states," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(9), pages 1507-1518, December.
    14. Bram Roudijk & Ayesha Sajjad & Brigitte Essers & Stefan Lipman & Peep Stalmeier & Aureliano Paolo Finch, 2022. "A Value Set for the EQ-5D-Y-3L in the Netherlands," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 193-203, December.
    15. Cate Bailey & Martin Howell & Rakhee Raghunandan & Amber Salisbury & Gang Chen & Joanna Coast & Jonathan C. Craig & Nancy J. Devlin & Elisabeth Huynh & Emily Lancsar & Brendan J. Mulhern & Richard Nor, 2022. "Preference Elicitation Techniques Used in Valuing Children’s Health-Related Quality-of-Life: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(7), pages 663-698, July.
    16. Kim Dalziel & Max Catchpool & Borja García-Lorenzo & Inigo Gorostiza & Richard Norman & Oliver Rivero-Arias, 2020. "Feasibility, Validity and Differences in Adolescent and Adult EQ-5D-Y Health State Valuation in Australia and Spain: An Application of Best–Worst Scaling," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(5), pages 499-513, May.
    17. Donna Rowen & Clara Mukuria & Philip A. Powell & Allan Wailoo, 2022. "Exploring the Issues of Valuing Child and Adolescent Health States Using a Mixed Sample of Adolescents and Adults," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 479-488, May.
    18. Zhihao Yang & Jie Jiang & Pei Wang & Xuejing Jin & Jing Wu & Yu Fang & Da Feng & Xiaoyu Xi & Shunping Li & Mingxia Jing & Bin Zheng & Weidong Huang & Nan Luo, 2022. "Estimating an EQ-5D-Y-3L Value Set for China," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 147-155, December.
    19. Joseph Kwon & Louise Freijser & Elisabeth Huynh & Martin Howell & Gang Chen & Kamran Khan & Shahd Daher & Nia Roberts & Conrad Harrison & Sarah Smith & Nancy Devlin & Kirsten Howard & Emily Lancsar & , 2022. "Systematic Review of Conceptual, Age, Measurement and Valuation Considerations for Generic Multidimensional Childhood Patient-Reported Outcome Measures," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 379-431, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nancy Devlin & Bram Roudijk & Rosalie Viney & Elly Stolk, 2022. "EQ-5D-Y-3L Value Sets, Valuation Methods and Conceptual Questions," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 123-127, December.
    2. Powell, Philip A. & Rowen, Donna & Keetharuth, Anju & Mukuria, Clara, 2024. "Understanding UK public views on normative decisions made to value health-related quality of life in children: A qualitative study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 340(C).
    3. Husbands, Samantha & Mitchell, Paul Mark & Kinghorn, Philip & Byford, Sarah & Breheny, Katie & Bailey, Cara & Anand, Paul & Peters, Tim J. & Floredin, Isabella & Coast, Joanna, 2024. "The development of a capability wellbeing measure in economic evaluation for children and young people aged 11-15," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 360(C).
    4. Jonathan L. Nazari & A. Simon Pickard & Ning Yan Gu, 2022. "Findings from a Roundtable Discussion with US Stakeholders on Valuation of the EQ-5D-Y-3L," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 139-146, December.
    5. David J. Mott & Nancy J. Devlin & Simone Kreimeier & Richard Norman & Koonal K. Shah & Oliver Rivero-Arias, 2022. "Analytical Considerations When Anchoring Discrete Choice Experiment Values Using Composite Time Trade-Off Data: The Case of EQ-5D-Y-3L," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 129-137, December.
    6. Louis S. Matza & Katie D. Stewart & Marie Fournier & Donna Rowen & Robin Lachmann & Maurizio Scarpa & Eugen Mengel & Travis Obermeyer & Evren Ayik & Fernando Laredo & Ruth Pulikottil-Jacob, 2024. "Assessment of health state utilities associated with adult and pediatric acid sphingomyelinase deficiency (ASMD)," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 25(8), pages 1437-1448, November.
    7. Paul Mark Mitchell & Samantha Husbands & Sarah Byford & Philip Kinghorn & Cara Bailey & Tim J. Peters & Joanna Coast, 2021. "Challenges in developing capability measures for children and young people for use in the economic evaluation of health and care interventions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(9), pages 1990-2003, September.
    8. Zhihao Yang & Jie Jiang & Pei Wang & Xuejing Jin & Jing Wu & Yu Fang & Da Feng & Xiaoyu Xi & Shunping Li & Mingxia Jing & Bin Zheng & Weidong Huang & Nan Luo, 2022. "Estimating an EQ-5D-Y-3L Value Set for China," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 147-155, December.
    9. Stefan A. Lipman & Liying Zhang & Koonal K. Shah & Arthur E. Attema, 2023. "Time and lexicographic preferences in the valuation of EQ-5D-Y with time trade-off methodology," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(2), pages 293-305, March.
    10. Jiaer Lin & Carlos King Ho Wong & Jason Pui Yin Cheung & Prudence Wing Hang Cheung & Nan Luo, 2022. "Psychometric performance of proxy-reported EQ-5D youth version 5-level (EQ-5D-Y-5L) in comparison with three-level (EQ-5D-Y-3L) in children and adolescents with scoliosis," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(8), pages 1383-1395, November.
    11. Huang, Li & Devlin, Nancy & Chen, Gang & Dalziel, Kim, 2024. "A happiness approach to valuing health states for children," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 348(C).
    12. Victoria Gale & Jill Carlton, 2023. "Including Young Children in the Development and Testing of Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) Instruments: A Scoping Review of Children’s Involvement and Qualitative Methods," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 16(5), pages 425-456, September.
    13. Sarah Dewilde & Bram Roudijk & Nafthali H. Tollenaar & Juan M. Ramos-Goñi, 2022. "An EQ-5D-Y-3L Value Set for Belgium," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 169-180, December.
    14. S. A. Lipman & V. T. Reckers-Droog & M. Karimi & M. Jakubczyk & A. E. Attema, 2021. "Self vs. other, child vs. adult. An experimental comparison of valuation perspectives for valuation of EQ-5D-Y-3L health states," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(9), pages 1507-1518, December.
    15. Stefan A. Lipman & Vivian T. Reckers-Droog, 2024. "Comparing heuristic valuation processes between health state valuation from child and adult perspectives," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 25(8), pages 1345-1360, November.
    16. Joanna M Charles & Deirdre M Harrington & Melanie J Davies & Charlotte L Edwardson & Trish Gorely & Danielle H Bodicoat & Kamlesh Khunti & Lauren B Sherar & Thomas Yates & Rhiannon Tudor Edwards, 2019. "Micro-costing and a cost-consequence analysis of the ‘Girls Active’ programme: A cluster randomised controlled trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, August.
    17. Kim Dalziel & Max Catchpool & Borja García-Lorenzo & Inigo Gorostiza & Richard Norman & Oliver Rivero-Arias, 2020. "Feasibility, Validity and Differences in Adolescent and Adult EQ-5D-Y Health State Valuation in Australia and Spain: An Application of Best–Worst Scaling," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(5), pages 499-513, May.
    18. Stevens, K, 2010. "Valuation of the Child Health Utility Index 9D (CHU9D)," MPRA Paper 29938, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Brazier, JE & Yang, Y & Tsuchiya, A, 2008. "A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) from non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures," MPRA Paper 29808, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Ian M. McCarthy, 2015. "Putting the Patient in Patient Reported Outcomes: A Robust Methodology for Health Outcomes Assessment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(12), pages 1588-1603, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:355:y:2024:i:c:s027795362400580x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.