Generic Health-Related Quality of Life Utility Measure for Preschool Children (Health Utilities Preschool): Design, Development, and Properties

Furlong, William; Rae, Charlene; Feeny, David; Ghotra, Satvinder; Breakey, Vicky R.; Carter, Teresa; Pai, Nikhil; Pullenayegum, Eleanor; Xie, Feng; Barr, Ronald D.

doi:10.1016/j.jval.2022.07.015

Cited by 12 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Values for the Health Utilities Preschool (HuPS) instrument for preschool children are obtained by mapping HuPS to the HUI3 instrument and using the value set that exists for the latter [ 33 ]. This enables both HuPS and HUI3 descriptive systems to be linked to a single age-invariant set of values relevant to both children and adults, avoiding the issues with age-specific values we have identified.…”

Section: Do We Need Age-specific Values? What Are the Alternatives?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Age-Specific Values for Pediatric HRQoL in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Is There a Problem to Be Solved? If So, How?

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Value sets for the EQ-5D-Y-3L published to date appear to have distinctive characteristics compared with value sets for corresponding adult instruments: in many cases, the value for the worst health state is higher and there are fewer values < 0. The aim of this paper is to consider how and why values for child and adult health differ; and what the implications of that are for the use of EQ-5D-Y-3L values in economic evaluations to inform healthcare resource allocation decisions. We posit four potential explanations for the differences in values: (a) The wording of severity labels may mean the worst problems on the EQ-5D-Y-3L are descriptively less severe than those on the EQ-5D-5L; (b) Adults may genuinely consider that children are less badly affected than adults by descriptively similar health issues. That is, for any given health problem, adult respondents in valuation studies consider children’s overall health-related quality of life (HRQoL) on average to be higher than that for adults; (c) Values are being sought by eliciting adults’ stated preferences for HRQoL in another person, rather than in themselves (regardless of whether the ‘other person’ concerned is a child); and (d) The need to elicit preferences for child HRQoL that are anchored at dead = 0 invokes special considerations regarding children’s survival. Existing evidence does not rule out the possibility that (c) and (d) exert an upward bias in values. We consider the implications of that for the interpretation and use of values for pediatric HRQoL. Alternative methods for valuing children’s HRQoL in a manner that is not ‘age specific’ are possible and may help to avoid issues of non-comparability. Use of these methods would place the onus on health technology assessment bodies to reflect any special considerations regarding child quality-adjusted life-year gains.

show abstract

Section: Do We Need Age-specific Values? What Are the Alternatives?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Age-Specific Values for Pediatric HRQoL in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Is There a Problem to Be Solved? If So, How?

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As stated above, conducting CUA for interventions targeting children under 5 presents distinct challenges compared to those designed for older children and adults. However, the ability to conduct studies in this age group has recently been facilitated by the development of three measurement instruments, the Infant health-related Quality of life Instrument [ 19 ] (IQI), the Health Utilities Preschool [ 20 ] (HuPs), and the Toddler and Infant (TANDI) instrument. IQI, HuPs, and TANDI are measure instruments developed for assessing the quality of life in children under 5 years old [ 21 , 22 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They allow producing a value score that can be used in CUA studies. These three instruments have been validated and found to be reliable for their respective target populations [ 19 , 20 ]. As with any instrument, there is a need for further validation in diverse populations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It was developed in Canada and Australia. It includes 12 items: emotion, hearing, speech, ambulation, dexterity, learning and remembering, thinking and problem-solving, pain, behavior, general health, self-care, and vision [ 20 ]. The TANDI instrument is another tool developed for assessing the quality of life in very young children, specifically those aged 1–36 months [ 21 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Economic Rationality in Decision-Making Regarding Newborn Screening: A Case Study in Quebec

Ho,

Giguère,

Reinharz

2024

IJNS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health systems in high-resource countries recognize the importance of making decisions about the services offered to the population based on scientific evidence. Producing this evidence is especially challenging in areas such as newborn care where the frequency of conditions is rare. However, methodological advances in the field of economic evaluation could change how this evidence is used in decision-making. This study aimed to investigate how decision-makers in the Canadian province of Quebec perceive the value of recent advances in economic evaluations for perinatal studies and how these advances might affect the offer of neonatal interventions in the public health care system. A qualitative study was conducted. A total of 10 policymakers were interviewed. A neo-institutional conceptual framework highlighting three dimensions, structure, power, and interpretive schemes, was used for data collection and analyses. Structural factors, interpretative schemes, and power management between the groups concerned concur to ensure that providing services to newborns is not hindered by the difficulty of producing evidence. They also ensure that the decisions regarding which disease to screen for take into consideration the specificity of neonatology, in particular, the social value given to children not captured by available evidence.

show abstract

“… 10 The CHSCS-PS forms the basis of the generic preference-based instrument Health Utilities-Preschool (HuPS), applicable to children 2 to 5 years of age. 21 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translation and cultural adaptation of the Health Utilities Preschool to Brazilian Portuguese

Viani

Bernardes²,

Veiga³

et al. 2024

Hematology, Transfusion and Cell Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Generic Health-Related Quality of Life Utility Measure for Preschool Children (Health Utilities Preschool): Design, Development, and Properties

Cited by 12 publications

References 24 publications

Using Age-Specific Values for Pediatric HRQoL in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Is There a Problem to Be Solved? If So, How?

Using Age-Specific Values for Pediatric HRQoL in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Is There a Problem to Be Solved? If So, How?

Economic Rationality in Decision-Making Regarding Newborn Screening: A Case Study in Quebec

Translation and cultural adaptation of the Health Utilities Preschool to Brazilian Portuguese

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About