Valuing EQ-5D-Y: the current state of play

[1]  W. Greiner,et al.  EQ-5D-Y Value Set for Germany , 2022, PharmacoEconomics.

[2]  S. Dewilde,et al.  Exploration of the Reasons Why Health State Valuation Differs for Children Compared With Adults: A Mixed Methods Approach. , 2022, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[3]  M. Karimi,et al.  Why Do Adults Value EQ-5D-Y-3L Health States Differently for Themselves Than for Children and Adolescents: A Think-Aloud Study. , 2022, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[4]  N. Roberts,et al.  Systematic Review of Conceptual, Age, Measurement and Valuation Considerations for Generic Multidimensional Childhood Patient-Reported Outcome Measures , 2022, PharmacoEconomics.

[5]  J. Brazier,et al.  The Online Elicitation of Personal Utility Functions (OPUF) tool: a new method for valuing health states , 2022, Wellcome open research.

[6]  O. Rivero-Arias,et al.  Accounting for Unobservable Preference Heterogeneity and Evaluating Alternative Anchoring Approaches to Estimate Country-Specific EQ-5D-Y Value Sets: A Case Study Using Spanish Preference Data. , 2021, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[7]  Titi Sahidah Fitriana,et al.  Comparing measurement properties of EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L in paediatric patients , 2021, Health and Quality of Life Outcomes.

[8]  R. Viney,et al.  How are Child-Specific Utility Instruments Used in Decision Making in Australia? A Review of Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee Public Summary Documents , 2021, PharmacoEconomics.

[9]  A. Attema,et al.  Self vs. other, child vs. adult. An experimental comparison of valuation perspectives for valuation of EQ-5D-Y-3L health states , 2021, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[10]  J. Brazier,et al.  Valuing child and adolescent health: a qualitative study on different perspectives and priorities taken by the adult general public , 2021, Health and Quality of Life Outcomes.

[11]  N. Gusi,et al.  Comparison of the Psychometric Properties of the EQ-5D-3L-Y and EQ-5D-5L-Y Instruments in Spanish Children and Adolescents. , 2021, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[12]  W. Greiner,et al.  Comparison of Adult and Adolescent Preferences Toward EQ-5D-Y-3L Health States , 2021, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[13]  S. Kreimeier,et al.  Think of the Children: A Discussion of the Rationale for and Implications of the Perspective Used for EQ-5D-Y Health State Valuation. , 2021, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[14]  S. Ikeda,et al.  Valuation Survey of EQ-5D-Y Based on the International Common Protocol: Development of a Value Set in Japan , 2021, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[15]  W. Greiner,et al.  EQ-5D-Y Value Set for Slovenia , 2021, PharmacoEconomics.

[16]  M. Herdman,et al.  Which multi-attribute utility instruments are recommended for use in cost-utility analysis? A review of national health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines , 2020, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[17]  N. Devlin,et al.  An exploration of methods for obtaining 0 = dead anchors for latent scale EQ-5D-Y values , 2020, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[18]  A. Wailoo,et al.  A Review of the Methods Used to Generate Utility Values in NICE Technology Assessments for Children and Adolescents. , 2020, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[19]  Mark Oppe,et al.  International Valuation Protocol for the EQ-5D-Y-3L , 2020, PharmacoEconomics.

[20]  A. Donders,et al.  A Head-On Ordinal Comparison of the Composite Time Trade-Off and the Better-Than-Dead Method. , 2020, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[21]  Donna Rowen,et al.  Review of Valuation Methods of Preference-Based Measures of Health for Economic Evaluation in Child and Adolescent Populations: Where are We Now and Where are We Going? , 2020, PharmacoEconomics.

[22]  P. Kind,et al.  EQ-5D-Y-5L: developing a revised EQ-5D-Y with increased response categories , 2019, Quality of Life Research.

[23]  N. Luo,et al.  A head-to-head comparison of five-level (EQ-5D-5L-Y) and three-level EQ-5D-Y questionnaires in paediatric patients , 2019, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[24]  Elly Stolk,et al.  Overview, Update, and Lessons Learned From the International EQ-5D-5L Valuation Work: Version 2 of the EQ-5D-5L Valuation Protocol. , 2019, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[25]  Mark Oppe,et al.  Valuation of EuroQol Five-Dimensional Questionnaire, Youth Version (EQ-5D-Y) and EuroQol Five-Dimensional Questionnaire, Three-Level Version (EQ-5D-3L) Health States: The Impact of Wording and Perspective. , 2018, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[26]  Deborah J Street,et al.  One Method, Many Methodological Choices: A Structured Review of Discrete-Choice Experiments for Health State Valuation , 2018, PharmacoEconomics.

[27]  Brendan J Mulhern,et al.  A new method for valuing health: directly eliciting personal utility functions , 2018, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[28]  R. Norman,et al.  How Should Discrete Choice Experiments with Duration Choice Sets Be Presented for the Valuation of Health States? , 2017, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[29]  D. Cohen,et al.  Publisher's Note , 2017, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[30]  J. Brazier,et al.  A Comparison of Methods for Converting DCE Values onto the Full Health-Dead QALY Scale , 2015, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[31]  N. Devlin,et al.  Time to tweak the TTO: results from a comparison of alternative specifications of the TTO , 2013, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[32]  Michael Herdman,et al.  Development of the EQ-5D-Y: a child-friendly version of the EQ-5D , 2010, Quality of Life Research.

[33]  G. Bonsel,et al.  Feasibility, reliability, and validity of the EQ-5D-Y: results from a multinational study , 2010, Quality of Life Research.

[34]  W. Brouwer,et al.  On the (not so) constant proportional trade-off in TTO , 2010, Quality of Life Research.

[35]  C. Carswell.  Measuring and Valuing Health Benefits for Economic Valuation , 2007, PharmacoEconomics.

[36]  N. Devlin,et al.  A note on the nature of utility in time and health and implications for cost utility analysis. , 2009, Social science & medicine.