Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/30495
Title: Health State Utility Values in Children and Adolescents with Disabilities: A Systematic Review
Authors: Kanya, L
Anokye, N
Alani, AH
Jayakumar, N
Ryan, JM
Keywords: health utilities;preference-based measures;utility measurement methods;disability;pediatric disabilities;preference elicitation;[sychometric evaluation
Issue Date: 15-Jan-2025
Publisher: Elsevier
Citation: Kanya, L. et al. (2025) 'Health State Utility Values in Children and Adolescents with Disabilities: A Systematic Review', The Journal of Pediatrics: Clinical Practice, 15, 200139, pp. 1 - 17. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedcp.2025.200139.
Abstract: Objectives: To 1) provide a comprehensive summary of the methods used to obtain health state utility values (HSUVs) from children and adolescents with disabilities (CAD), 2) describe the administration and psychometric properties of these methods in children and adolescents with disabilities, and 3) report summary statistics for HSUVs obtained from each method. Study design: English-language studies from MEDLINE (via PubMed), PsychInfo, Scopus, CINAHL Plus, EconLit, and Embase, were searched from inception to November 2024. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts. Studies were included if they utilized direct or indirect methods to measure HSUVs, reported utilities and/or psychometric properties of these measures, and involved CAD aged 0-19 years. Two reviewers independently extracted study details including sample descriptors, instruments used and summary statistics. Studies quality was assessed using a novel tool derived from three validated checklists. Results: Of the 3,541 screened articles, 31 met inclusion criteria. Only two studies used direct methods, such as Time Trade-Off (TTO), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Standard Gamble (SG), while 29 employed generic measures [e.g., EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), Health Utilities Index 3 (HUI-3)] with diverse preference elicitation methods. Excessive dependence on proxy respondents was noted, and psychometric properties of generic measures were mixed. Conclusions: Inconsistent HSUVs reporting and limited data availability is common. Reported HSUV summary statistics may be inaccurate if methodologies are unsuitable for the population. This review emphasizes the need for validated instruments to assess HSUVs in CAD.
URI: https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/30495
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedcp.2025.200139
Other Identifiers: ORCiD: Lucy Kanya https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4312-118X
ORCiD: Nana Anokye https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3615-344X
ORCiD: Ahmad Hecham Alani https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6318-3017
ORCiD: Jennifer M. Ryan https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3768-2132
200139
Appears in Collections:Dept of Health Sciences Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
FullText.pdfCopyright © 2025 The Authors . Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under a Creative Commons license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).432.95 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons