Engaging experts on valuation of toddler and infant health: the case of EQ-TIPS

Valuing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in children aged 0–4 years presents major methodological and normative challenges, as children cannot be directly involved and standard approaches to adults’ valuation of adult and older children’s health states may be inappropriate. In order to inform decisions on how to value HRQoL in children aged 0–4 years, this study explored the views of academic and HTA experts, as end users of this evidence, on the methodological and normative challenges involved, using the EuroQol Toddler and Infant Populations (EQ-TIPS) instrument as a case study. Two online focus groups were conducted: one with eight academic experts in health economics and valuation, and one with six health technology assessment (HTA) experts. Participants reviewed preparatory materials, including the EQ-TIPS EV3.0 questionnaire. Semi-structured discussions focused on four topics: age-specific values for EQ-TIPS versus mapping; choice of respondents; treatment of caregiver spillover effects and long-term consequences; and valuation and anchoring methods. Discussions were recorded, anonymized, summarized, and reviewed by participants. Views differed within and between groups. Academic experts were divided between supporting age-specific values for EQ-TIPS and favoring mapping to value sets for older children due to conceptual and feasibility concerns. In contrast, HTA experts questioned the need for a standalone EQ-TIPS value set, preferring consistency of values across pediatric age groups and viewing mapping as pragmatic. No consensus emerged on appropriate respondents, though both groups highlighted the need for empirical evidence comparing the preferences of general population adults and caregivers. The potential consideration of caregiver and future health impact in valuation of EQ-TIPS was widely acknowledged but contentious, and anchoring methods remained unresolved, with HTA experts favoring discrete choice experiments with mapping and academics experts calling for further research. Valuing HRQoL in infants and toddlers involves unresolved methodological challenges. HTA experts considered mapped values to be acceptable and appropriate. Further research is required both to establish the feasibility of mapping EQ-TIPS to EQ-5D-Y; to explore methods for valuing EQ-TIPS, and to test whether values differ between parents/caregivers and other adults.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Published
2026-10-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-026-02650-5
Primary Topic
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Engaging experts on valuation of toddler and infant health: the case of EQ-TIPS

Janine Verstraete, Stefan A. Lipman, Nancy J. Devlin, Rahma C. Putri
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
article

Engaging experts on valuation of toddler and infant health: the case of EQ-TIPS

Janine Verstraete, Stefan A. Lipman, Nancy J. Devlin, Rahma C. Putri
article en

Abstract

Valuing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in children aged 0–4 years presents major methodological and normative challenges, as children cannot be directly involved and standard approaches to adults’ valuation of adult and older children’s health states may be inappropriate. In order to inform decisions on how to value HRQoL in children aged 0–4 years, this study explored the views of academic and HTA experts, as end users of this evidence, on the methodological and normative challenges involved, using the EuroQol Toddler and Infant Populations (EQ-TIPS) instrument as a case study. Two online focus groups were conducted: one with eight academic experts in health economics and valuation, and one with six health technology assessment (HTA) experts. Participants reviewed preparatory materials, including the EQ-TIPS EV3.0 questionnaire. Semi-structured discussions focused on four topics: age-specific values for EQ-TIPS versus mapping; choice of respondents; treatment of caregiver spillover effects and long-term consequences; and valuation and anchoring methods. Discussions were recorded, anonymized, summarized, and reviewed by participants. Views differed within and between groups. Academic experts were divided between supporting age-specific values for EQ-TIPS and favoring mapping to value sets for older children due to conceptual and feasibility concerns. In contrast, HTA experts questioned the need for a standalone EQ-TIPS value set, preferring consistency of values across pediatric age groups and viewing mapping as pragmatic. No consensus emerged on appropriate respondents, though both groups highlighted the need for empirical evidence comparing the preferences of general population adults and caregivers. The potential consideration of caregiver and future health impact in valuation of EQ-TIPS was widely acknowledged but contentious, and anchoring methods remained unresolved, with HTA experts favoring discrete choice experiments with mapping and academics experts calling for further research. Valuing HRQoL in infants and toddlers involves unresolved methodological challenges. HTA experts considered mapped values to be acceptable and appropriate. Further research is required both to establish the feasibility of mapping EQ-TIPS to EQ-5D-Y; to explore methods for valuing EQ-TIPS, and to test whether values differ between parents/caregivers and other adults.

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
University of Cape Town (ZA), The University of Melbourne (AU), Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
EuroQol Research Foundation
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.