ArticlePharmacoEconomics2025
Do the Age of Children and Parental Status Matter in Valuing the Child Health Utility 9D (CHU9D)?
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Estimating the Economic Value of Supported Online Parent-Led Cognitive Behavioral Therapy to Prevent Child Anxiety Problems: Economic Evaluation of the MYCATS Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Trial
- Justifying and Classifying Adults' Roles in Child Health State Valuation: A Novel Taxonomy.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Review
- EQ-5D(-Y) Valuation from Adult and Child Perspectives: Where Does the Empirical Evidence Leave Us and How Should We Proceed?PharmacoEconomics · 2026Review
- Valuing health states for infants and toddlers: challenges and methodological considerations in EQ-TIPS preference elicitation.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to test whether preferences for children's health states differ (a) when considering those aged 2-4 years compared with older children and (b) by parental status; we also aim to provide a value set that can be used for 2-4 years old.
methodsHealth states were described using the Child Health Utility 9D (CHU9D). A discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey was administered between September 2023 and March 2024 to a representative sample of the Australian general adult population which included a 20% quota of parents of 0-18-year-old children. Participants were randomly allocated to two study arms considering the health of a 2-4-year-old or a 10-year-old child. A conditional logit model was used to obtain the latent values from the choice responses. The differences in latent values between the two ages and between parental status were analyzed using relative attribute importance (RAI), poolability test, and pooled model with interaction terms. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) responses were used to anchor the latent values onto a 0-1 utility scale.
resultsIn all, 3112 participants were included. Results suggested that the preferences between the two age perspectives were similar, with only 1 out of 36 interaction terms being significant. Preferences of parents of children aged 0-18 years differed from those who were not, as indicated by three significant interaction terms and failure in poolability testing, having smaller disutility for severe health states in the Pain, Tired, and Joining in Activities dimensions.
conclusionIn the valuation of CHU9D health states, asking respondents to consider a 2-4-year-old compared with a 10-year-old did not influence adults' preferences; however, the preferences of respondents who were parents of 0-18-year-olds at that time differed from those who were not. Two CHU9D value sets are reported for children 2 years and older, one derived from the general adult population and the other from parents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.