2023PharmacoEconomicsOpen access

Comparative Psychometric Performance of Common Generic Paediatric Health-Related Quality of Life Instrument Descriptive Systems: Results from the Australian Paediatric Multi-Instrument Comparison Study

Renee Jones, Rachel O’Loughlin, Xiuqin Xiong, Mina Bahrampour, Nancy J. Devlin, Harriet Hiscock, Gang Chen, Brendan James Mulhern, Kim Dalziel, on behalf of the Quality of Life in Kids: Key Evidence to Strengthen Decisions in Australia (QUOKKA) Project Team

Open full text 28 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the psychometric performance of common generic paediatric health-related quality-of-life instrument descriptive systems (PedsQL generic core 4.0, EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, Child Health Utility 9D [CHU9D], Assessment of Quality of Life 6D [AQoL-6D], and Health Utilities Index Mark 3 [HUI3]) by child age, report type, and health status. METHODS: Data for children aged 5-18 years were from the Australian Paediatric Multi-Instrument Comparison study. Ceiling effects, test-retest reliability, known-group validity, convergent and divergent validity, and responsiveness were assessed in the total sample and by child age (5-12 years vs 13-18 years), report type (self- vs proxy report), and health status. Instruments were scored using an exploratory level sum score (LSS) approach. RESULTS: Survey data were available for 5945 children, with follow-up data available for 2346 children. The EQ-5D-Y-3L demonstrated ceiling effects. The PedsQL, EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, and CHU9D demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability. All instruments demonstrated known-group, convergent, and divergent validity. The EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, and CHU9D demonstrated responsiveness to improvements in health and the PedsQL, EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, and CHU9D to worsening health. The AQoL-6D and HUI3 had inconclusive test-retest reliability and responsiveness evidence due to small sample size. Importantly, ceiling effects, test-retest reliability and responsiveness varied by subgroup. CONCLUSION: Results reflect instrument performance using LSSs, which may differ to utility scores. In the total sample, the EQ-5D-Y-5L and CHU9D descriptive systems demonstrated evidence of good performance (i.e., meeting prespecified criteria) across all psychometric attributes tested. Performance varied by child age and report type, indicating room for considerations by population and study.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the psychometric performance of common generic paediatric health-related quality-of-life instrument descriptive systems (PedsQL generic core 4.0, EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, Child Health Utility 9D [CHU9D], Assessment of Quality of Life 6D [AQoL-6D], and Health Utilities Index Mark 3 [HUI3]) by child age, report type, and health status. METHODS: Data for children aged 5-18 years were from the Australian Paediatric Multi-Instrument Comparison study. Ceiling effects, test-retest reliability, known-group validity, convergent and divergent validity, and responsiveness were assessed in the total sample and by child age (5-12 years vs 13-18 years), report type (self- vs proxy report), and health status. Instruments were scored using an exploratory level sum score (LSS) approach. RESULTS: Survey data were available for 5945 children, with follow-up data available for 2346 children. The EQ-5D-Y-3L demonstrated ceiling effects. The PedsQL, EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, and CHU9D demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability. All instruments demonstrated known-group, convergent, and divergent validity. The EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, and CHU9D demonstrated responsiveness to improvements in health and the PedsQL, EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, and CHU9D to worsening health. The AQoL-6D and HUI3 had inconclusive test-retest reliability and responsiveness evidence due to small sample size. Importantly, ceiling effects, test-retest reliability and responsiveness varied by subgroup. CONCLUSION: Results reflect instrument performance using LSSs, which may differ to utility scores. In the total sample, the EQ-5D-Y-5L and CHU9D descriptive systems demonstrated evidence of good performance (i.e., meeting prespecified criteria) across all psychometric attributes tested. Performance varied by child age and report type, indicating room for considerations by population and study.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 28 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the psychometric performance of common generic paediatric health-related quality-of-life instrument descriptive systems (PedsQL generic core 4.0, EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, Child Health Utility 9D [CHU9D], Assessment of Quality of Life 6D [AQoL-6D], and Health Utilities Index Mark 3 [HUI3]) by child age, report type, and health status. METHODS: Data for children aged 5-18 years were from the Australian Paediatric Multi-Instrument Comparison study. Ceiling effects, test-retest reliability, known-group validity, convergent and divergent validity, and responsiveness were assessed in the total sample and by child age (5-12 years vs 13-18 years), report type (self- vs proxy report), and health status. Instruments were scored using an exploratory level sum score (LSS) approach. RESULTS: Survey data were available for 5945 children, with follow-up data available for 2346 children. The EQ-5D-Y-3L demonstrated ceiling effects. The PedsQL, EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, and CHU9D demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability. All instruments demonstrated known-group, convergent, and divergent validity. The EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, and CHU9D demonstrated responsiveness to improvements in health and the PedsQL, EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, and CHU9D to worsening health. The AQoL-6D and HUI3 had inconclusive test-retest reliability and responsiveness evidence due to small sample size. Importantly, ceiling effects, test-retest reliability and responsiveness varied by subgroup. CONCLUSION: Results reflect instrument performance using LSSs, which may differ to utility scores. In the total sample, the EQ-5D-Y-5L and CHU9D descriptive systems demonstrated evidence of good performance (i.e., meeting prespecified criteria) across all psychometric attributes tested. Performance varied by child age and report type, indicating room for considerations by population and study.

Key concepts: Ceiling effect, EQ-5D, Health Utilities Index, Quality of life (healthcare), Convergent validity, Medicine, Reliability (semiconductor), Psychometrics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparative Psychometric Performance of Common Generic Paediatric Health-Related Quality of Life Instrument Descriptive Systems: Results from the Australian Paediatric Multi-Instrument Comparison Study — Research Paper | ScholarLens