ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2025
An Australian Value Set for the EQ-5D-Y-3L.
Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Influence of Perspective on the Valuation of the EQ-5D-Y-3L: A Comparison Using the OPUF Tool and a Discrete Choice Experiment.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Trial
- Public Preferences and Willingness to Pay for a Multidisciplinary Colorectal and Pelvic Reconstruction Service.The patient · 2026Article
- Article
- Do EQ-5D-Y-3L value sets have common properties, and how do they compare to EQ-5D-5L value sets?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Valuation of the EQ-5D-Y-5L Using DCE Methods That Account for Nonlinear Time Preferences.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026Article
- Self-esteem patterns and the associations with health-related quality of life, self-rated health and lifestyle behaviour among junior high school students: a latent class analysis.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- EQ-5D-Y-3L population norms for children in Mainland China derived from a national survey 2023-2024.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025Article
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
backgroundAustralia has a well-established health technology assessment process and there is extensive use of generic health related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments in evidence presented to it. However, there are gaps in tools and evidence available to support evaluation of paediatric health. The aim of this paper is to produce an Australian EQ-5D-Y-3L (Y-3L) value set.
methodsThe methods follow the international Y-3L valuation protocol, but with an expanded design. Data were collected using Composite Time Trade Off (cTTO) and Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) data from two independent samples of adult members of the Australian general public. In total, 52 Y-3L health states, assigned into four blocks of 14 health states each containing health state 33333, were valued using cTTO. cTTO data were collected via videoconferencing interview and each respondent valued 14 health states. Mean observed cTTO values were adjusted for censoring at -1 using a Tobit model. For the DCE component, 150 latent scale DCE choice pairs were collected via an online survey with each participant completing 15 pairs. DCE data were modelled using a garbage class mixed logit model. Two approaches to anchor DCE data to the Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) scale were explored: anchoring on the value for the worst health state (33333); and mapping DCE data onto the mean cTTO values using all 52 health states. Two evaluation criteria were used to select the final value set: (1) coefficient significance and logical consistency; (2) prediction accuracy of the mean observed cTTO values.
resultsIn total, 268 individuals participated in the cTTO interviews, and 1002 completed the DCE. The linear mapping without intercept performed best and was selected as the final value set. Health state values ranged between 0.142 and 1. The relative importance of domains by level 3 coefficients (ordered from most to least important) was: pain/discomfort, then feeling worried, sad or unhappy, usual activities, looking after myself, and mobility.
conclusionThis study reports an Australian value set for the Y-3L, which enables the calculation of QALYs for use in the economic evaluation of paediatric interventions and can support evidence development and decision making.
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.