IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v36y2016i2p199-209.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuation of Child Behavioral Problems from the Perspective of US Adults

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin M. Craig
  • Derek S. Brown
  • Bryce B. Reeve

Abstract

Objective . To assess preferences between child behavioral problems and estimate their value on a quality-adjusted life year (QALY) scale. Methods . Respondents, age 18 or older, drawn from a nationally representative panel between August 2012 and February 2013 completed a series of paired comparisons, each involving a choice between 2 different behavioral problems described using the Behavioral Problems Index (BPI), a 28-item instrument with 6 domains (Anxious/Depressed, Headstrong, Hyperactive, Immature Dependency, Anti-social, and Peer Conflict/Social Withdrawal). Each behavioral problem lasted 1 or 2 years for an unnamed child, age 7 or 10 years, with no suggested relationship to the respondent. Generalized linear model analyses estimated the value of each problem on a QALY scale, considering its duration and the child’s age. Results . Among 5207 eligible respondents, 4155 (80%) completed all questions. Across the 6 domains, problems relating to antisocial behavior were the least preferred, particularly the items related to cheating, lying, bullying, and cruelty to others. Conclusions . The findings are the first to produce a preference-based summary measure of child behavioral problems on a QALY scale. The results may inform both clinical practice and resource allocation decisions by enhancing our understanding of difficult tradeoffs in how adults view child behavioral problems. Understanding US values also promotes national health surveillance by complementing conventional measures of surveillance, survival, and diagnoses.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin M. Craig & Derek S. Brown & Bryce B. Reeve, 2016. "Valuation of Child Behavioral Problems from the Perspective of US Adults," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(2), pages 199-209, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:36:y:2016:i:2:p:199-209
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X15594370
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X15594370
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X15594370?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin M. Craig & A. Simon Pickard & Elly Stolk & John E. Brazier, 2013. "US Valuation of the SF-6D," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 33(6), pages 793-803, August.
    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.

      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:sae:medema:v:36:y:2016:i:2:p:199-209. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

      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.