IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v25y2016i6p768-777.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuation of Child Health‐Related Quality of Life in the United States

Author

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

Abstract

Many economic analyses fail to incorporate evidence on child health‐related quality of life because of a paucity of quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) estimates. This health valuation study is the first to summarize the EQ‐5D‐Y on a QALY scale. Drawn from a nationally representative panel, 5207 adult respondents were asked to choose between two losses in child health‐related quality of life. Based on their choices, a 1‐year increase in child pain/discomfort from ‘some’ to ‘a lot’ equals a loss of 4 QALYs (95% CI, 3.8–4.4). Likewise, a 1‐year increase in child anxiety/depression from ‘a bit’ to ‘very worried, sad, or unhappy’ equals a loss of 2 QALYs (95% CI, 1.9–2.2). These findings enable the integration of child‐reported outcomes with adult preferences to inform economic analysis. Results inform both clinical practice and resource allocation decisions by enhancing understanding of difficult tradeoffs in child‐reported outcomes. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin M. Craig & Wolfgang Greiner & Derek S. Brown & Bryce B. Reeve, 2016. "Valuation of Child Health‐Related Quality of Life in the United States," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(6), pages 768-777, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:25:y:2016:i:6:p:768-777
    DOI: 10.1002/hec.3184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.3184
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/hec.3184?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. Julie Ratcliffe & Leah Couzner & Terry Flynn & Michael Sawyer & Katherine Stevens & John Brazier & Leonie Burgess, 2011. "Valuing child health utility 9D health states with a young adolescent sample," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 15-27, January.
    2. Kristina Secnik & Louis S. Matza & Suzi Cottrell & Eric Edgell & Dominic Tilden & Sally Mannix, 2005. "Health State Utilities for Childhood Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Based on Parent Preferences in the United Kingdom," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 25(1), pages 56-70, January.
    3. William J Furlong & David H. Feeny & George W. Torrance & Ronald D. Barr, 2001. "The Health Utilities Index (HUI®) System for Assessing Health-Related Quality of Life in Clinical Studies," Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis Working Paper Series 2001-02, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis (CHEPA), McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
    4. Katherine Stevens, 2012. "Valuation of the Child Health Utility 9D Index," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(8), pages 729-747, August.
    5. David Feeny, 2013. "Standardization and Regulatory Guidelines May Inhibit Science and Reduce the Usefulness of Analyses Based on the Application of Preference-Based Measures for Policy Decisions," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 33(3), pages 316-319, April.
    6. Lancsar, Emily & Wildman, John & Donaldson, Cam & Ryan, Mandy & Baker, Rachel, 2011. "Deriving distributional weights for QALYs through discrete choice experiments," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 466-478, March.
    7. Anonymous, 1958. "World Health Organization," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 391-394, July.
    8. Lisa Prosser & James Hammitt & Ron Keren, 2007. "Measuring Health Preferences for Use in Cost-Utility and Cost-Benefit Analyses of Interventions in Children," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 25(9), pages 713-726, September.
    9. Benjamin M. Craig, 2009. "The duration effect: a link between TTO and VAS values," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(2), pages 217-225, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. Sesil Lim & Marcel F. Jonker & Mark Oppe & Bas Donkers & Elly Stolk, 2018. "Severity-Stratified Discrete Choice Experiment Designs for Health State Evaluations," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(11), pages 1377-1389, November.
    3. Cristina Valcárcel-Nazco & Yolanda Ramallo-Fariña & Renata Linertová & Juan Manuel Ramos-Goñi & Lidia García-Pérez & Pedro Serrano-Aguilar, 2022. "Health-Related Quality of Life and Perceived Burden of Informal Caregivers of Patients with Rare Diseases in Selected European Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-13, July.
    4. Valentina Prevolnik Rupel & Marko Ogorevc, 2021. "EQ-5D-Y Value Set for Slovenia," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(4), pages 463-471, April.

    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. 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.
    2. Jennifer A Whitty & Ruth Walker & Xanthe Golenko & Julie Ratcliffe, 2014. "A Think Aloud Study Comparing the Validity and Acceptability of Discrete Choice and Best Worst Scaling Methods," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-9, April.
    3. Samer A. Kharroubi & Yara Beyh & Marwa Diab El Harake & Dalia Dawoud & Donna Rowen & John Brazier, 2020. "Examining the Feasibility and Acceptability of Valuing the Arabic Version of SF-6D in a Lebanese Population," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-15, February.
    4. Mason, Helen & van Exel, Job & Baker, Rachel & Brouwer, Werner & Donaldson, Cam, 2016. "From representing views to representativeness of views: Illustrating a new (Q2S) approach in the context of health care priority setting in nine European countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 205-213.
    5. Hansen, Kristian S. & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Østerdal, Lars P., 2023. "Productivity and quality-adjusted life years: QALYs, PALYs and beyond," Working Papers 11-2023, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    6. Martin Buxton & James Chambers, 2011. "What values do the public want their health care systems to use in evaluating technologies?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 12(4), pages 285-288, August.
    7. Round, Jeff, 2012. "Is a QALY still a QALY at the end of life?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 521-527.
    8. Kaspar Walter Meili & Anna Månsdotter & Linda Richter Sundberg & Jan Hjelte & Lars Lindholm, 2022. "An initiative to develop capability-adjusted life years in Sweden (CALY-SWE): Selecting capabilities with a Delphi panel and developing the questionnaire," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-21, February.
    9. Lancsar, Emily & Gu, Yuanyuan & Gyrd-Hansen, Dorte & Butler, Jim & Ratcliffe, Julie & Bulfone, Liliana & Donaldson, Cam, 2020. "The relative value of different QALY types," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    10. Caswell, Julie A., 1988. "Federal and State Regulations of Food Product Safety and Quality: A Selected, Partially Annotated Bibliography," Miscellaneous Publications 320010, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    11. Axel Mühlbacher & Anika Kaczynski & Peter Zweifel & F. Johnson, 2015. "Experimental measurement of preferences in health and healthcare using best-worst scaling: an overview," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-14, December.
    12. Natalia Soto-Coloballes, 2020. "The Development of Air Pollution in Mexico City," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(2), pages 21582440209, June.
    13. Baker, Rachel & Mason, Helen & McHugh, Neil & Donaldson, Cam, 2021. "Public values and plurality in health priority setting: What to do when people disagree and why we should care about reasons as well as choices," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    14. 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.
    15. Unknown, 1964. "The World Food Budget: 1970," Foreign Agricultural Economic Report (FAER) 144071, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    16. Jane K L Teh & Nai Peng Tey & Sor Tho Ng, 2014. "Ethnic and Gender Differentials in Non-Communicable Diseases and Self-Rated Health in Malaysia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-8, March.
    17. Carrasco, Luis Roman & Souza Monteiro, Diogo M. & Cook, Alasdair J.C. & Moffitt, L. Joe, 2010. "Economics of Robust Surveillance on Exotic Animal Diseases: the Case of Bluetongue," 2010 Annual Meeting, July 25-27, 2010, Denver, Colorado 61817, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Richard Cookson & Shehzad Ali & Aki Tsuchiya & Miqdad Asaria, 2018. "E‐learning and health inequality aversion: A questionnaire experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(11), pages 1754-1771, November.
    19. van Exel, Job & Baker, Rachel & Mason, Helen & Donaldson, Cam & Brouwer, Werner, 2015. "Public views on principles for health care priority setting: Findings of a European cross-country study using Q methodology," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 128-137.
    20. Martin Ringsten & Susanne Iwarsson & Eva Månsson Lexell, 2022. "PROTOCOL: Interventions to improve outdoor mobility among adults with disability," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(4), 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:wly:hlthec:v:25:y:2016:i:6:p:768-777. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749 .

    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.