ArticlePharmacoEconomics2025
Eliciting and Anchoring Health State Preferences Using Discrete Choice Experiments Among Adults, Adolescents, and Children.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2025. 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
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to compare EQ-5D-Y-5L health state preferences among children, adolescents, and adults in Canada using a discrete choice experiment (DCE), and to explore the feasibility of a rescaling latent DCE using anchoring tasks collected from adolescents.
methodsAn online survey was conducted to elicit preferences for EQ-5D-Y-5L health states from children (aged 12-15 years), adolescents (aged 16-17 years), and adults (aged ≥ 18 years). All respondents completed 12 latent DCE tasks. Adults and adolescents were randomly assigned to three additional anchoring tasks using a DCE with duration or with dead. The tasks were framed from the perspective of a 10-year-old child for adults and their own perspective for children and adolescents. Respondents provided feedback on the difficulty of latent DCE tasks. Mixed logit models were used to analyze latent DCE data. Anchored DCE models using duration/dead tasks were estimated and compared between adults and adolescents.
resultsOverall, 546 children, 508 adolescents, and 908 adults were included in the analyses. A higher proportion of children indicated it easy to complete DCE tasks compared with adolescents and adults. Monotonicity of coefficients were observed in latent DCE models among adults but not among children and adolescents. Anchored DCE modeling performed better in adults than in adolescents regarding monotonicity and statistical significance of coefficients, and the DCE with duration performed slightly better than the DCE with dead.
conclusionsThere were differences in health state preferences elicited using DCEs between children/adolescents and adults. Anchoring tasks appeared feasible for adolescents, with a DCE with duration performing slightly better than a DCE with dead.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40828359What 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.