Comparing the Psychometric Performance of Generic Paediatric Health-Related Quality of Life Instruments in Children and Adolescents with ADHD, Anxiety and/or Depression.

O'Loughlin, R; Jones, R; Chen, G; Mulhern, B; Hiscock, H; Devlin, N; Dalziel, K; Quality Of Life in Kids: Key evidence to strengthen decisions in Australia (QUOKKA) project team,

Comparing the Psychometric Performance of Generic Paediatric Health-Related Quality of Life Instruments in Children and Adolescents with ADHD, Anxiety and/or Depression.

O'Loughlin, R Jones, R Chen, G Mulhern, B

Hiscock, H Devlin, N Dalziel, K Quality Of Life in Kids: Key evidence to strengthen decisions in Australia (QUOKKA) project team,

Permalink

Publisher:: ADIS INT LTD
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Pharmacoeconomics, 2024, 42, (Suppl 1), pp. 57-77
Issue Date:: 2024-06

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Published versionAdobe PDF (988.29 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	O'Loughlin, R
dc.contributor.author	Jones, R
dc.contributor.author	Chen, G
dc.contributor.author	Mulhern, B https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3656-8063
dc.contributor.author	Hiscock, H
dc.contributor.author	Devlin, N
dc.contributor.author	Dalziel, K
dc.contributor.author	Quality Of Life in Kids: Key evidence to strengthen decisions in Australia (QUOKKA) project team,
dc.date.accessioned	2024-10-08T23:45:01Z
dc.date.available	2023-10-11
dc.date.available	2024-10-08T23:45:01Z
dc.date.issued	2024-06
dc.identifier.citation	Pharmacoeconomics, 2024, 42, (Suppl 1), pp. 57-77
dc.identifier.issn	1170-7690
dc.identifier.issn	1179-2027
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/181255
dc.description.abstract	OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the validity, reliability and responsiveness of common generic paediatric health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments in children and adolescents with mental health challenges. METHODS: Participants were a subset of the Australian Paediatric Multi-Instrument Comparison (P-MIC) study and comprised 1013 children aged 4-18 years with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (n = 533), or anxiety and/or depression (n = 480). Participants completed an online survey including a range of generic paediatric HRQoL instruments (PedsQL, EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, CHU9D) and mental health symptom measures (SDQ, SWAN, RCADS-25). A subset of participants also completed the HUI3 and AQoL-6D. The psychometric performance of each HRQoL instrument was assessed regarding acceptability/feasibility; floor/ceiling effects; convergent validity; known-group validity; responsiveness and test-retest reliability. RESULTS: The PedsQL, CHU9D, EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L showed similarly good performance for acceptability/feasibility, known-group validity and convergent validity. The CHU9D and PedsQL showed no floor or ceiling effects and fair-good test-retest reliability. Test-retest reliability was lower for the EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L. The EQ-5D-Y-3L showed the highest ceiling effects, but was the top performing instrument alongside the CHU9D on responsiveness to improvements in health status, followed by the PedsQL. The AQoL-6D and HUI3 showed good acceptability/feasibility, no floor or ceiling effects, and good convergent validity, yet poorer performance on known-group validity. Responsiveness and test-retest reliability were not able to be assessed for these two instruments. In subgroup analyses, performance was similar for all instruments for acceptability/feasibility, known-group and convergent validity, however, relative strengths and weaknesses for each instrument were noted for ceiling effects, responsiveness and test-retest reliability. In sensitivity analyses using utility scores, performance regarding known-group and convergent validity worsened slightly for the EQ-5D-Y-3L and CHU9D, though improved slightly for the HUI3 and AQoL-6D. CONCLUSIONS: While each instrument showed strong performance in some areas, careful consideration of the choice of instrument is advised, as this may differ dependent on the intended use of the instrument, and the age, gender and type of mental health condition of the population in which the instrument is being used. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR-ACTRN12621000657820.
dc.format	Print-Electronic
dc.language	eng
dc.publisher	ADIS INT LTD
dc.relation.ispartof	Pharmacoeconomics
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1007/s40273-024-01354-2
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject	11 Medical and Health Sciences, 14 Economics
dc.subject.classification	Health Policy & Services
dc.subject.classification	3214 Pharmacology and pharmaceutical sciences
dc.subject.classification	3801 Applied economics
dc.subject.classification	4203 Health services and systems
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Quality of Life
dc.subject.mesh	Child
dc.subject.mesh	Adolescent
dc.subject.mesh	Psychometrics
dc.subject.mesh	Male
dc.subject.mesh	Female
dc.subject.mesh	Reproducibility of Results
dc.subject.mesh	Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity
dc.subject.mesh	Anxiety
dc.subject.mesh	Surveys and Questionnaires
dc.subject.mesh	Australia
dc.subject.mesh	Depression
dc.subject.mesh	Child, Preschool
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Reproducibility of Results
dc.subject.mesh	Depression
dc.subject.mesh	Anxiety
dc.subject.mesh	Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity
dc.subject.mesh	Psychometrics
dc.subject.mesh	Quality of Life
dc.subject.mesh	Adolescent
dc.subject.mesh	Child
dc.subject.mesh	Child, Preschool
dc.subject.mesh	Australia
dc.subject.mesh	Female
dc.subject.mesh	Male
dc.subject.mesh	Surveys and Questionnaires
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Quality of Life
dc.subject.mesh	Child
dc.subject.mesh	Adolescent
dc.subject.mesh	Psychometrics
dc.subject.mesh	Male
dc.subject.mesh	Female
dc.subject.mesh	Reproducibility of Results
dc.subject.mesh	Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity
dc.subject.mesh	Anxiety
dc.subject.mesh	Surveys and Questionnaires
dc.subject.mesh	Australia
dc.subject.mesh	Depression
dc.subject.mesh	Child, Preschool
dc.title	Comparing the Psychometric Performance of Generic Paediatric Health-Related Quality of Life Instruments in Children and Adolescents with ADHD, Anxiety and/or Depression.
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	42
utslib.location.activity	New Zealand
utslib.for	11 Medical and Health Sciences
utslib.for	14 Economics
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney/UTS Groups
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney/UTS Groups/Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE)
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
dc.rights.license	This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
dc.date.updated	2024-10-08T23:44:57Z
pubs.issue	Suppl 1
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	42
utslib.citation.issue	Suppl 1

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the validity, reliability and responsiveness of common generic paediatric health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments in children and adolescents with mental health challenges. METHODS: Participants were a subset of the Australian Paediatric Multi-Instrument Comparison (P-MIC) study and comprised 1013 children aged 4-18 years with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (n = 533), or anxiety and/or depression (n = 480). Participants completed an online survey including a range of generic paediatric HRQoL instruments (PedsQL, EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, CHU9D) and mental health symptom measures (SDQ, SWAN, RCADS-25). A subset of participants also completed the HUI3 and AQoL-6D. The psychometric performance of each HRQoL instrument was assessed regarding acceptability/feasibility; floor/ceiling effects; convergent validity; known-group validity; responsiveness and test-retest reliability. RESULTS: The PedsQL, CHU9D, EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L showed similarly good performance for acceptability/feasibility, known-group validity and convergent validity. The CHU9D and PedsQL showed no floor or ceiling effects and fair-good test-retest reliability. Test-retest reliability was lower for the EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L. The EQ-5D-Y-3L showed the highest ceiling effects, but was the top performing instrument alongside the CHU9D on responsiveness to improvements in health status, followed by the PedsQL. The AQoL-6D and HUI3 showed good acceptability/feasibility, no floor or ceiling effects, and good convergent validity, yet poorer performance on known-group validity. Responsiveness and test-retest reliability were not able to be assessed for these two instruments. In subgroup analyses, performance was similar for all instruments for acceptability/feasibility, known-group and convergent validity, however, relative strengths and weaknesses for each instrument were noted for ceiling effects, responsiveness and test-retest reliability. In sensitivity analyses using utility scores, performance regarding known-group and convergent validity worsened slightly for the EQ-5D-Y-3L and CHU9D, though improved slightly for the HUI3 and AQoL-6D. CONCLUSIONS: While each instrument showed strong performance in some areas, careful consideration of the choice of instrument is advised, as this may differ dependent on the intended use of the instrument, and the age, gender and type of mental health condition of the population in which the instrument is being used. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR-ACTRN12621000657820.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/181255