ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2026
Nothing about us, without us? A reflection on and call for involving children in the process of valuing child health.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A key question in economic evaluation is whose preferences health-related quality of life (HRQoL) values should be based on. This question becomes increasingly prominent and complex when it comes to the evaluation of health interventions aimed at children, as this requires the valuation of child health states. Resulting discussions have focused on whose preferences should be elicited, from what perspective, and how - highlighting important challenges. As opposed to current EQ-5D-Y protocol (i.e., valuation of child health states by adult members of the public), this paper explores the potential involvement of children in the process of valuing child health. We identified arguments for public involvement in healthcare decision-making in the broader literature and examined their relevance to involving children in the health state valuation (HSV) process. Overall, in line with recent empirical findings, the arguments provide a basis for broadly exploring the involvement of children. Given the concerns regarding the direct involvement of children in HSV tasks, we call for a shift of thinking in two ways: children can be involved in the process of coming to HRQoL values in more ways than only HSV tasks, and the focus should move from whether children should be involved in HSV to exploring how they can be involved.
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.