Literature DB >> 35168891

Why Do Adults Value EQ-5D-Y-3L Health States Differently for Themselves Than for Children and Adolescents: A Think-Aloud Study.

Vivian Reckers-Droog1, Milad Karimi2, Stefan Lipman3, Janine Verstraete4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Following protocol, adults value EQ-5D-Y-3L health states from the perspective of a 10-year-old child. It remains unclear why adults value health states differently for themselves than for a 10-year-old child and whether the latter perspective is representative of adults' preferences for the 8 to 15 years age range of the EQ-5D-Y-3L. This study examines the reasons underlying (potential) differences in adults' health-state preferences for themselves, a 10-year-old child, and 15-year-old adolescent.
METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews using a think-aloud protocol with 25 participants who performed valuation tasks in July 2020 to August 2020. Using the Framework Method, we developed 28 categories grouped under 5 themes that illustrated the differences emerging from the interviews.
RESULTS: Participants (A) deemed it more straining to perform valuation tasks for a 10-year-old child and 15-year-old adolescent than for themselves, (B) had a stable self-image, but varied in whom they imagined as 10-year-old child and 15-year-old adolescent, (C) focused on different dimensions and levels for a 15-year-old adolescent than for a 10-year-old child and themselves, (D) had various thoughts about nonhealth-related factors that influenced their preferences, and (E) gave up relatively few life-years for a 10-year-old child and 15-year-old adolescent, also to avoid others bearing a grudge against them.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that differences in adults' health-state preferences for themselves and a 10-year-old child largely result from differences in thoughts about nonhealth-related factors. They further indicate that health-state preferences for a 10-year-old child may not be representative of such preferences for the full EQ-5D-Y-3L age range.
Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  EQ-5D-Y; adolescents; children; health-related quality of life; health-state valuation; qualitative methods; quality-adjusted life-year; think aloud

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35168891     DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2021.12.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.101


  5 in total

1.  Valuing EQ-5D-Y: the current state of play.

Authors:  N Devlin; T Pan; S Kreimeier; J Verstraete; E Stolk; K Rand; M Herdman
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2022-07-06       Impact factor: 3.077

2.  In a Child's Shoes: Composite Time Trade-Off Valuations for EQ-5D-Y-3L with Different Proxy Perspectives.

Authors:  Stefan A Lipman; Brigitte A B Essers; Aureliano P Finch; Ayesha Sajjad; Peep F M Stalmeier; Bram Roudijk
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2022-10-18       Impact factor: 4.558

3.  EQ-5D-Y Value Set for Germany.

Authors:  Simone Kreimeier; David Mott; Kristina Ludwig; Wolfgang Greiner
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2022-05-23       Impact factor: 4.558

4.  Time and lexicographic preferences in the valuation of EQ-5D-Y with time trade-off methodology.

Authors:  Stefan A Lipman; Liying Zhang; Koonal K Shah; Arthur E Attema
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2022-05-21

5.  Value Set for the EQ-5D-Y-3L in Hungary.

Authors:  Fanni Rencz; Gábor Ruzsa; Alex Bató; Zhihao Yang; Aureliano Paolo Finch; Valentin Brodszky
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2022-09-20       Impact factor: 4.558

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.