Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40679687›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2026

Valuing health states for infants and toddlers: challenges and methodological considerations in EQ-TIPS preference elicitation.

Nancy Devlin, Bram Roudijk, Michael Herdman, Elly Stolk, Richard Norman, Simone Kreimeier, Janine Verstraete

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Measuring health-related quality of life in infants and toddlers: conceptual challenges and proposed recommendations.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Nancy DevlinMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, 207 Bouverie Street, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3010, Australia. nancy.devlin@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1561-5361
Bram RoudijkEuroQol Research Foundation, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5000-0875
Michael HerdmanSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8189-5357
Elly StolkEuroQol Research Foundation, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Richard NormanCurtin University, Bentley, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3112-3893
Simone KreimeierBielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4832-7833
Janine VerstraeteUniversity of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1148-4747

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many health care interventions are aimed at very young children, including public health measures such as vaccines, and new, high-cost medicines for rare diseases. This has led to increasing interest in evidence on the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of treatments in this age group. EQ-TIPS has been developed as a concise, generic health outcomes measure in 0-3-year-olds. Preference weights for EQ-TIPS are required to facilitate its use in economic evaluation. The aim of this paper is to consider the issues likely to be encountered in attempts to elicit stated preferences for EQ-TIPS. We begin by identifying the challenges that would arise if the existing EQ-5D-Y-3L ('Y-3L') valuation protocol were used as a starting point to value EQ-TIPS states. We highlight the challenges specific to valuing EQ-TIPS over and above the challenges already noted in valuing the Y-3L. We then discuss broader issues that may arise in valuing EQ-TIPS: (a) the potential influence on values of respondents taking into account the future consequences of developmental delay arising from poor health in infants, and (b) spill-over effects of poor health in infants on parents/caregivers. Methods used in valuing other instruments in this age group are reviewed. We conclude that eliciting stated preferences for EQ-TIPS would require adapting existing valuation methods. Parent-based valuation may be a viable approach, although methodological complexities remain. Alternative means of preference weighting EQ-TIPS, including mapping to the EQ-5D-Y, may offer a way forward.

Indexed as

Health StatusOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient PreferenceChild, PreschoolCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansInfantInfant, NewbornQuality-Adjusted Life YearsQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesChild QALYsHRQoLPediatricsUtilitiesValuesYoung children

Identifiers

PMID40679687
PMCPMC13046671

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.