Abstract
Abstract
Objective
This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare differences in health utilities (HUs) assessed by self and proxy respondents in children, as well as to evaluate the effects of health conditions, valuation methods, and proxy types on the differences.
Methods
Eligible studies published in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to December 2019 were identified according to PRISMA guidelines. Meta-analyses were performed to calculate the weighted mean differences (WMDs) in HUs between proxy- versus self-reports. Mixed-effects meta-regressions were applied to explore differences in WMDs among each health condition, valuation method and proxy type.
Results
A total of 30 studies were finally included, comprising 211 pairs of HUs assessed by 15,294 children and 16,103 proxies. This study identified 34 health conditions, 10 valuation methods, and 3 proxy types. In general, proxy-reported HUs were significantly different from those assessed by children themselves, while the direction and magnitude of these differences were inconsistent regarding health conditions, valuation methods, and proxy types. Meta-regression demonstrated that WMDs were significantly different in patients with ear diseases relative to the general population; in those measured by EQ-5D, Health utility index 2 (HUI2), and Pediatric asthma health outcome measure relative to Visual analogue scale method; while were not significantly different in individuals adopting clinician-proxy and caregiver-proxy relative to parent-proxy.
Conclusion
Divergence existed in HUs between self and proxy-reports. Our findings highlight the importance of selecting appropriate self and/or proxy-reported HUs in health-related quality of life measurement and economic evaluations.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,General Medicine
Reference59 articles.
1. Drummond MF SM, Claxton K, et al. Methods forthe Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes, 4th ed2015.
2. Excellence NIfHaC. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. 2013.
3. PBAC. Guidelines for preparing submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (Version 4.5) (2015).
4. CADTH. Guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies: Canada 4th Edition (2017).
5. Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use (5th edition). Aust N Z J Public Health. 2016;40(3):294–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-6405.12484.
Cited by
18 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献