Who should value children's health and how? An international Delphi study
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4589916 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Philip A Powell (0000-0003-1169-3431, University of Sheffield, corresponding author), Donna Rowen (0000-0003-3018-5109, University of Sheffield), Anju Keetharuth (0000-0001-8889-6806, University of Sheffield), Clara Mukuria (0000-0003-4318-1481, University of Sheffield), Koonal Shah (0000-0002-4927-7858, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 355 |
| Pages | 117127 |
| Publication date | 2024-08-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Social Science & Medicine (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0277-9536 • E-ISSN: 1873-5347 |
| Publisher | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117127 |
| PMID | 39019000 |
| OpenAlex | W4400520384 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 47 |
Valuing child health necessitates normative methodological decisions on whose preferences should be elicited and who should be imagined as experiencing impaired health. Formal guidance is limited and expert consensus unclear. This study sought to establish the degree of consensus among expert stakeholders on normative issues of who to ask and who should be imagined when valuing child health (7-17 years) to inform UK health technology assessment. Sixty-two experts (n = 47 in Round 2) from 18 countries participated in a modified, two-round online Delphi survey (Round 1: May-June 2023; Round 2: September-October 2023). Participants were expert stakeholders in child health valuation, including academics (n = 38); industry/consultancy representatives (including the charity/not-for-profit sector; n = 13); and UK policy/government representatives (n = 11). The Delphi survey was modified between rounds and consisted of 9-point Likert, categorical, multiple-choice, and free-text questions on normative issues in valuing child health. Responses were analysed descriptively and thematically. An a priori criterion of ≥75% agreement was established for formal consensus, while areas approaching consensus (≥70% agreement) and without consensus were identified as a future research primer. Consensus was observed that older adolescents (aged 16-17 years) and adults (18+ years) should be asked to value child health states. There was consensus that the former should think about themselves when valuing the health states and the latter should imagine a child of some form (e.g., imagining themselves as a child or another hypothetical child). However, no consensus was evident on what form this should take. Several other methodological issues also reached consensus. These findings are largely consistent with recent views elicited qualitatively from members of the public and other stakeholders on normative issues in valuing child health. The results mean that, contrary to what has been done in previous child health valuation studies, efforts should be made to involve both older adolescents (16+ years) and adults in child health valuation
Delphi method · Normative · Political science · Public relations · Delphi Technique in Research · Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · Law · Medicine · Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare · Psychology
Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development.
Guidance on Conducting and REporting DElphi Studies (CREDES) in palliative care
Defining consensus
Delphi Technique in Health Sciences
Understanding Canadian stakeholders’ views on measuring and valuing health for children and adolescents
Like holding the axe on who should live or not’
Understanding UK public views on normative decisions made to value health-related quality of life in children
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |