Proxy Preferences and the Values of Children's Health States.

Journal

PharmacoEconomics

ISSN: 1179-2027

Titre abrégé: Pharmacoeconomics

Pays: New Zealand

ID NLM: 9212404

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
22 Jul 2024

Historique:

accepted: 04 07 2024

medline: 23 7 2024

pubmed: 23 7 2024

entrez: 22 7 2024

Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

To assign values to the health states of children, some health economists have suggested relying on the 'proxy' preferences among the health states of children expressed by a random sample of the adult population. These preferences have been elicited in several ways, with respondents sometimes asked to express their (adult) preferences among the health states of children, and sometimes asked to imagine themselves as children and to express what they think their preferences would be. This essay discusses three grounds for eliciting the preferences of a random sample of adults that have been suggested as ways to assign values to the health states in the EQ-5D-Y, and criticizes the first two: (1) the evidential ground: the preferences of the population sample are good evidence of how good or bad the health states of children are; (2) the 'taxpayer' ground: the adult population has the authority to assign values to health states, therefore their preferences are determinative; and (3) the pragmatic grounds: surveying is straightforward and shifts the responsibility from health economists to the population. I argue that instead of surveying a random sample of the population, health economists should rely on deliberative groups that include older children, experts on children's health and development, as well as members of the population at large. These groups should engage with the reasons that lie behind preferences among health states.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1007/s40273-024-01415-6 PMID: 39039378

pubmed: 39039378

doi: 10.1007/s40273-024-01415-6

pii: 10.1007/s40273-024-01415-6

doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

Informations de copyright

Références

Kwon J, Freijser L, et al. Systematic review of conceptual, age, measurement and valuation considerations for generic multidimensional childhood patient-reported outcome measures. Pharmacoeconomics. 2022;40(4):379–431.

doi: 10.1007/s40273-021-01128-0 pubmed: 35072935 pmcid: 9007803

Ramos-Goñi J, Oppe M, Stolk E, Shah K, Kreimeier S, Rivero-Arias O, Devlin N. International valuation protocol for the EQ-5D-Y-3L. Pharmacoeconomics. 2020;38:653–63.

doi: 10.1007/s40273-020-00909-3 pubmed: 32297224

Germain N, Aballéa S, Toumi M. Measuring health-related quality of life in young children: How far have we come? J Market Access Health Policy. 2019;7:1. https://doi.org/10.1080/20016689.2019.1618661 .

doi: 10.1080/20016689.2019.1618661

Fayed N, Camargo O, Kerr E, Rosenbaum P, Dubey A, Bostan C, Faulhaber M, Raina P, Cieza A. Generic patient-reported outcomes in child health research: a review of conceptual content using World Health Organization definitions. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2012;54:1085–95.

doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2012.04393.x pubmed: 22913566

Huang I, Revicki D, Schwartz C. Measuring pediatric patient-reported outcomes: good, but a long way to go. Qual Life Res. 2014;23:747–50.

doi: 10.1007/s11136-013-0607-2 pubmed: 24362765 pmcid: 4301734

Karimi M, Brazier J. Health, health-related quality of life, and quality of life: what is the difference? Pharmacoeconomics. 2016;34:645–9.

doi: 10.1007/s40273-016-0389-9 pubmed: 26892973

Powell PA, Rowen D, Rivero-Arias O, Tsuchiya A, Brazier JE. Valuing child and adolescent health: a qualitative study on different perspectives and priorities taken by the adult general public. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2021;19:1–14.

doi: 10.1186/s12955-021-01858-x

Hausman D. Measuring health: well-being, freedom, and suffering. New York: Oxford University Press; 2015.

Sugden R. The community of advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2018.

doi: 10.1093/oso/9780198825142.001.0001

Craig B, Brown D, Reeve B. The value adults place on child health and functional status. Value Health. 2015;18:449–56.

doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2015.02.012 pubmed: 26091599 pmcid: 4475576

Lipman S, Reckers-Droog V, Kreimeier S. Think of the children: a discussion of the rationale for and implications of the perspective used for EQ-5D-Y health state valuation. Value Health. 2021;24:976–82.

doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2021.01.011 pubmed: 34243841

Powell P, Karimi M, Rowen D, et al. Hypothetical versus experienced health state valuation: a qualitative study of adult general public views and preferences. Qual Life Res. 2023;32(4):1187–97.

doi: 10.1007/s11136-022-03304-x pubmed: 36422771

Richardson J. Welfarism or non-welfarism? Public preferences for willingness to pay versus health maximisation. Monash University Centre for Health Economics. Research Paper 2005 (10)

Powell P, Rowen D, Keetharuth A, Mukuria C. Understanding UK public views on normative decisions made to value health-related quality of life in children: a qualitative study. Soc Sci Med. 2024;340:116506.

Shah K, Ramos-Goñi J, Kreimeier S, Devlin N. An exploration of methods for obtaining 0 = dead anchors for latent scale EQ-5D-Y values. Health Econ. 2020;21:1091–103.

Wille N, Badia X, Bonsel G, Burström K, Cavrini G, Devlin N, et al. Development of the EQ-5D-Y: a child-friendly version of the EQ-5D. Qual Life Res. 2010;19:875–86.

doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9648-y pubmed: 20405245 pmcid: 2892611

Eiser C, Morse R. A review of measures of quality of life for children with chronic illness. Arch Dis Child. 2001;84:205–11.

doi: 10.1136/adc.84.3.205 pubmed: 11207164 pmcid: 1718699

Matza L, Swensen A, Flood E, Secnik K, Leidy N. Assessment of health-related quality of life in children: a review of conceptual, methodological, and regulatory issues. Value Health. 2004;7:79–92.

doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2004.71273.x pubmed: 14720133

Raat H, Bonsel G, Essink-Bot M, Landgraf J, Gemke R. Reliability and validity of comprehensive health status measures in children: the child health questionnaire in relation to the health utilities index. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55:67–76.

doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(01)00411-5 pubmed: 11781124

Ravens-Sieberer U, Erhart M, Wille N, Wetzel R, Nickel J, Bullinger M. Generic health-related quality of life assessment in children and adolescents: methodological considerations. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24:1199–220.

doi: 10.2165/00019053-200624120-00005 pubmed: 17129075

Ravens-Sieberer U, Wille N, Badia X, Bonsel G, Burström K, Cavrini G, et al. Feasibility, reliability, and validity of the EQ-5D-Y: results from a multinational study. Qual Life Res. 2010;19(6):887–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9649-x .

doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9649-x pubmed: 20401552 pmcid: 2892614

Shiroiwa T, Ikeda S, Noto S, Fukuda T, Stolk E. Valuation survey of EQ-5D-Y based on the International Common Protocol: development of a value set in Japan. Med Decis Making. 2021;41:597–606.

doi: 10.1177/0272989X211001859 pubmed: 33754886 pmcid: 8191148

Varni J, Burwinkle T, Lane M. Health-related quality of life measurement in paediatric clinical practice: an appraisal and precept for future research and application. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2005;3:34. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-3-34 .

doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-3-34 pubmed: 15904527 pmcid: 1156928

Verrips E, Vogels C, Koopman H, Theunissen N, Kamphuis S, Fekkes M, et al. Measuring health-related quality of life in a child population. Eur J Public Health. 1999;9:188–93.

doi: 10.1093/eurpub/9.3.188

Tsuchiya A, Watson V. Re-thinking ‘The different perspectives that can be used when eliciting preferences in health.’ Health Econ. 2017;26:e103–7.

doi: 10.1002/hec.3480 pubmed: 28322480

Kreimeier S, Oppe M, Ramos-Goñi J, Cole A, Devlin N, Herdman M, et al. Valuation of EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire, youth version (EQ-5D-Y) and EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire, three-level version (EQ-5D-3L) health states: the impact of wording and perspective. Value Health. 2018;21:1291–8.

doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.05.002 pubmed: 30442276

Kreimeier S, Greiner W. EQ-5D-Y as a health-related quality of life instrument for children and adolescents: the instrument’s characteristics, development, current use, and challenges of developing its value set. Value Health. 2019;22:31–7.

doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.11.001 pubmed: 30661631

Lipman S, Reckers-Droog V, Karimi M, Attema A. Self vs. other, child vs. adult. an experimental comparison of valuation perspectives for valuation of EQ-5D-Y-3L health states. Eur J Health Econ. 2021;22:1507–18.

doi: 10.1007/s10198-021-01377-y pubmed: 34611793 pmcid: 8492455

Lipman S, Brigitte A, Essers A, Finch A, Sajjad A, Stalmeier P, et al. In a child’s shoes: composite time trade-off valuations for EQ-5D-Y-3L with different proxy perspectives. Pharmacoeconomics. 2022;40(Suppl 2):S181–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-022-01202-1 .

doi: 10.1007/s40273-022-01202-1

Devlin N, Pan T, Kreimeier S, Verstraete J, Stolk E, Rand K, et al. Valuing EQ-5D-Y: the current state of play. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2022;20:105. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-022-01998-8 .

doi: 10.1186/s12955-022-01998-8 pubmed: 35794607 pmcid: 9260978

Smith A. The theory of moral sentiments. 1759 Rpt. Indianapolis: Liberty Press; 1982.

Galesic M, de Bruin W, Dalege J, Feld S, Kreuter F, Olsson H, et al. Human social sensing is an untapped resource for computational social science. Nature. 2021;595(7866):214–22.

doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03649-2 pubmed: 34194037

Reckers-Droog V, Karimi M, Lipman S, Verstraete J. Why do adults value EQ-5D-Y-3L health states differently for themselves than for children and adolescents: a think-aloud study. Value Health. 2022;25:1174–84.

doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2021.12.014 pubmed: 35168891

Karimi M, Brazier J, Paisley S. How do individuals value health states? A qualitative investigation. Soc Sci Med. 2017;172:80–8.

doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.11.027 pubmed: 27912142

Baker R, Mason H, McHugh N, Donaldson C. 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. Soc Sci Med. 2021;277: 113892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113892 .

doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113892 pubmed: 33882440 pmcid: 8135121

Forrest M, Christopher D, Simpson L, Clancy C. Child health services research: challenges and opportunities. JAMA. 1997;277:1787–93.

doi: 10.1001/jama.1997.03540460051032 pubmed: 9178792