Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41013479›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2025

Assessing well-being in younger populations in economic evaluations: a scoping review of multidimensional instruments.

Zhirui Guo, Diana Marcela Nova Diaz, Stefan A Lipman, Leona Hakkaart-van Roijen

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Zhirui GuoErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, Rotterdam, 3000 DR, the Netherlands. guo@eshpm.eur.nl.
Diana Marcela Nova DiazDepartment of Economics, Public University of Navarre (Universidad Pública de Navarra), Navarra, Spain.
Stefan A LipmanErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, Rotterdam, 3000 DR, the Netherlands.
Leona Hakkaart-van RoijenErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, PO Box 1738, Rotterdam, 3000 DR, the Netherlands.

Funding

NWO NWA.1292.19.226
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo comprehensively evaluate health care interventions in younger populations, outcome measurement in economic evaluation may need to be expanded beyond health-related quality of life to include well-being. However, whether appropriate well-being instruments exist for children remains uncertain. This study provides a systematic overview of multidimensional well-being instruments for children and assesses their potential applicability for economic evaluation.

methodsThis scoping review was reported following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The search strategy included terms related to "well-being," "child or adolescent," and "instrument", and was implemented in four electronic databases, yielding a total of 9622 articles. Two reviewers independently screened articles with ASReview, a machine-learning-based tool for expediting screening, and manually extracted information from relevant articles. Findings were synthesized narratively, highlighting consistency and discrepancies, as well as potential suitability for economic evaluation (using multiple criteria).

resultsTwentyfive studies were included, published between 1993 and 2024. On average, instruments assessed well-being with five dimensions and 38 questions. Common dimensions included physical, health, school, satisfaction, relationship(s), emotional and self. Dimensions that capture children's daily experiences, such as family, achievement, education and after-school activities were frequently considered.

conclusionThe review highlights the variety of well-being instruments for children. Although many instruments measure well-being comprehensively, only ICECAP-CYP fit all criteria for suitability for economic evaluation. The small number of potentially suitable instruments highlights a growing yet still insufficient interest in moving beyond traditional HRQoL assessments in younger populations.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeAdolescentChildCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansPersonal SatisfactionSurveys and QuestionnairesEconomic evaluationMultidimensional assessmentPaediatric well-beingSystematic scoping reviewWell-being instrument

Identifiers

PMID41013479
PMCPMC12465456

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.