IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v24y2023i8d10.1007_s10198-022-01542-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing an Australian utility value set for the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale-4D (ECOHIS-4D) using a discrete choice experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Ruvini M. Hettiarachchi

    (Queensland University of Technology (QUT))

  • Peter Arrow

    (University of Adelaide
    Dental Health Services
    University of Western Australia)

  • Sameera Senanayake

    (Queensland University of Technology (QUT))

  • Hannah Carter

    (Queensland University of Technology (QUT))

  • David Brain

    (Queensland University of Technology (QUT))

  • Richard Norman

    (Curtin University)

  • Utsana Tonmukayawul

    (Deakin University)

  • Lisa Jamieson

    (University of Adelaide)

  • Sanjeewa Kularatna

    (Queensland University of Technology (QUT))

Abstract

Purpose Preference-based quality of life measures (PBMs) are used to generate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in economic evaluations. A PBM consists of (1) a health state classification system and (2) a utility value set that allows the instrument responses to be converted to QALYs. A new, oral health-specific classification system, the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale-4D (ECOHIS-4D) has recently been developed. The aim of this study was to generate an Australian utility value set for the ECOHIS-4D. Methods A discrete choice experiment with duration (DCETTO) was used as the preference elicitation technique. An online survey was administered to a representative sample of Australian adults over 18 years. Respondents were given 14 choice tasks (10 tasks from the DCE design of 50 choice sets blocked into five blocks, 2 practice tasks, a repeated and a dominant task). Data were analyzed using the conditional logit model. Results A total of 1201 respondents from the Australian general population completed the survey. Of them, 69% (n = 829) perceived their oral health status to be good, very good, or excellent. The estimated coefficients from the conditional logit models were in the expected directions and were statistically significant (p

Suggested Citation

  • Ruvini M. Hettiarachchi & Peter Arrow & Sameera Senanayake & Hannah Carter & David Brain & Richard Norman & Utsana Tonmukayawul & Lisa Jamieson & Sanjeewa Kularatna, 2023. "Developing an Australian utility value set for the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale-4D (ECOHIS-4D) using a discrete choice experiment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(8), pages 1285-1296, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:24:y:2023:i:8:d:10.1007_s10198-022-01542-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-022-01542-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-022-01542-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-022-01542-x?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. Gang Chen & Julie Ratcliffe, 2015. "A Review of the Development and Application of Generic Multi-Attribute Utility Instruments for Paediatric Populations," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(10), pages 1013-1028, October.
    2. Edward J. D. Webb & John O’Dwyer & David Meads & Paul Kind & Penny Wright, 2020. "Transforming discrete choice experiment latent scale values for EQ-5D-3L using the visual analogue scale," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(5), pages 787-800, July.
    3. Brendan Mulhern & Richard Norman & Deborah J. Street & Rosalie Viney, 2019. "One Method, Many Methodological Choices: A Structured Review of Discrete-Choice Experiments for Health State Valuation," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 29-43, January.
    4. 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.
    5. Tracy A. Comans & Kim-Huong Nguyen & Julie Ratcliffe & Donna Rowen & Brendan Mulhern, 2020. "Valuing the AD-5D Dementia Utility Instrument: An Estimation of a General Population Tariff," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(8), pages 871-881, August.
    6. Mina Bahrampour & Richard Norman & Joshua Byrnes & Martin Downes & Paul A. Scuffham, 2021. "Utility Values for the CP-6D, a Cerebral Palsy-Specific Multi-Attribute Utility Instrument, Using a Discrete Choice Experiment," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 14(1), pages 129-138, January.
    7. Katherine Stevens, 2012. "Valuation of the Child Health Utility 9D Index," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(8), pages 729-747, August.
    8. Julie Ratcliffe & Elisabeth Huynh & Katherine Stevens & John Brazier & Michael Sawyer & Terry Flynn, 2016. "Nothing About Us Without Us? A Comparison of Adolescent and Adult Health‐State Values for the Child Health Utility‐9D Using Profile Case Best–Worst Scaling," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(4), pages 486-496, 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. 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.
    2. 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).
    3. 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.
    4. Ratcliffe, Julie & Huynh, Elisabeth & Chen, Gang & Stevens, Katherine & Swait, Joffre & Brazier, John & Sawyer, Michael & Roberts, Rachel & Flynn, Terry, 2016. "Valuing the Child Health Utility 9D: Using profile case best worst scaling methods to develop a new adolescent specific scoring algorithm," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 48-59.
    5. Clara Mukuria & Donna Rowen & Sue Harnan & Andrew Rawdin & Ruth Wong & Roberta Ara & John Brazier, 2019. "An Updated Systematic Review of Studies Mapping (or Cross-Walking) Measures of Health-Related Quality of Life to Generic Preference-Based Measures to Generate Utility Values," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 295-313, June.
    6. Husbands, Samantha & Mitchell, Paul Mark & Kinghorn, Philip & Byford, Sarah & Bailey, Cara & Anand, Paul & Peters, Tim J. & Floredin, Isabella & Coast, Joanna, 2024. "Is well-becoming important for children and young people? Evidence from in-depth interviews with children and young people and their parents," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 122060, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. 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.
    8. Julio Gallego-Méndez & Jorge Perez-Gomez & José Ignacio Calzada-Rodríguez & Ángel Manuel Denche-Zamorano & María Mendoza-Muñoz & Jorge Carlos-Vivas & Miguel Ángel Garcia-Gordillo & Jose C. Adsuar, 2020. "Relationship between Health-Related Quality of Life and Physical Activity in Children with Hyperactivity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-16, April.
    9. Ruslan Jabrayilov & Antoinette D I van Asselt & Karin M Vermeulen & Sheri Volger & Patrick Detzel & Livia Dainelli & Paul F M Krabbe & for the Pediatrics expert group, 2018. "A descriptive system for the Infant health-related Quality of life Instrument (IQI): Measuring health with a mobile app," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-14, August.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Rissanen, Elisa & Karjalainen, Piia & Kiviruusu, Olli & Kankaanpää, Eila & Aronen, Eeva T. & Haula, Taru & Sääksvuori, Lauri & Vornanen, Riitta & Linnosmaa, Ismo, 2024. "Cost-effectiveness of a parenting program to reduce children’s behavioral problems among families receiving child protection services and other family support services – A randomized controlled trial," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    13. Richard De Abreu Lourenço & Nancy Devlin & Kirsten Howard & Jason J. Ong & Julie Ratcliffe & Jo Watson & Esther Willing & Elisabeth Huynh, 2021. "Giving a Voice to Marginalised Groups for Health Care Decision Making," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 14(1), pages 5-10, January.
    14. Chris Sampson;Martina Garau, 2019. "How Should We Measure Quality of Life Impact in Rare Disease? Recent Learnings in Spinal Muscular Atrophy," Briefing 002146, Office of Health Economics.
    15. 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).
    16. Rachael Maree Hunter & Mark Isaac & Alessandra Frigiola & David Blundell & Kate Brown & Kate Bull, 2013. "Lifetime Costs and Outcomes of Repair of Tetralogy of Fallot Compared to Natural Progression of the Disease: Great Ormond Street Hospital Cohort," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-7, March.
    17. Valentina Prevolnik Rupel & Marko Ogorevc, 2021. "EQ-5D-Y Value Set for Slovenia," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(4), pages 463-471, April.
    18. Ramesh Lamsal & Jennifer D. Zwicker, 2017. "Economic Evaluation of Interventions for Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders: Opportunities and Challenges," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 763-772, December.
    19. Edward J. D. Webb & Paul Kind & David Meads & Adam Martin, 2021. "Does a health crisis change how we value health?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(10), pages 2547-2560, September.
    20. Wenjing Zhou & Anle Shen & Zhihao Yang & Pei Wang & Bin Wu & Michael Herdman & Nan Luo, 2021. "Patient-caregiver agreement and test–retest reliability of the EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L in paediatric patients with haematological malignancies," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(7), pages 1103-1113, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Preference based; Quality-adjusted life years; Children; Health state valuations; Discrete choice experiments; Economic evaluation; Oral health; Early childhood; Pediatric;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C35 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions

    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:spr:eujhec:v:24:y:2023:i:8:d:10.1007_s10198-022-01542-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.