QALY weights for neurosensory impairments in pediatric economic evaluations: Case studies and a critique

Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 293-308

  Grosse, Scott D ^a   Prosser, Lisa A ^b   Asakawa, Keiko ^c   Feeny, David ^d  

^a NATIONAL CENTER ON BIRTH DEFECTS AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^c CANADIAN AGENCY FOR DRUGS AND TECHNOLOGIES IN HEALTH   (Canada)

^d Center for Health Research   (United States)

Author keywords

quality adjusted life years

Indexed keywords

MENINGOCOCCUS VACCINE; PNEUMOCOCCUS VACCINE;

CASE STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDER; DISEASE SEVERITY; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; HEARING LOSS; HUMAN; IMMUNIZATION; INTELLECTUAL IMPAIRMENT; MENINGOCOCCOSIS; METABOLIC DISORDER; NEWBORN SCREENING; PEDIATRICS; PNEUMOCOCCAL INFECTION; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SENSORY DYSFUNCTION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; CHILD; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY; NEWBORN; PROCEDURES; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

CHILD; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HEARING LOSS; HUMANS; IMMUNIZATION; INFANT, NEWBORN; INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY; NEONATAL SCREENING; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

EID: 77953710259     PISSN: 14737167     EISSN: 17448379     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1586/erp.10.24     Document Type: Review

References (126)

1. Gold MR, Stevenson D, Fryback DG. HALYs and QALYs and DALYs, oh my: similarities and differences in summary measures of population health. Annu. Rev. Public Health 23, 115-134 (2002).
2. Sassi F. Calculating QALYs, comparing QALY and DALY calculations. Health Policy Plan. 21, 402-408 (2006).
3. Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddard GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes (2nd Edition). Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK (1997).
4. Neumann PJ, Goldie SJ, Weinstein MC. Preference-based measures in economic evaluation in health care. Annu. Rev. Public Health 21, 587-611 (2000).
5. Bell CM, Chapman RH, Stone PW, Sandberg EA, Neumann PJ. An off-the-shelf help list: a comprehensive catalog of preference scores from published cost-utility analyses. Med. Decis. Making 21, 288-294 (2001).
6. Prosser LA, Hammitt JK, Keren R. Measuring health preferences for use in cost-utility and cost-benefit analyses of interventions in children: theoretical and methodological considerations. Pharmacoeconomics 25, 713-726 (2007).
7. Carroll AE, Downs SM. Improving decision analyses: parent preferences (utility values) for pediatric health outcomes. J. Pediatr. 155, 21-25 (2009).
8. Petrou S, Kupek E. Estimating preference-based health utilities index mark 3 utility scores for childhood conditions in England and Scotland. Med. Decis. Making 29, 291-303 (2009).
9. Griebsch I, Coast J, Brown J. Quality-adjusted life-years lack quality in pediatric care: a critical review of published cost-utility studies in child health. Pediatrics 115, E600-E614 (2005).
10. Sung L, Petrou S, Ungar WJ. Measurement of health utilities in children. In: Economic Evaluation in Child Health. Ungar W (Ed.). Oxford University Press, NY, USA 77-90 (2009).
11. Saigal S, Rosenbaum P, Stoskopf B et al. Development, reliability and validity of a new measure of overall health for pre-school children. Qual. Life Res. 14, 243-257 (2005).
12. Tilford JM. Cost-effectiveness analysis and emergency medical services for children: issues and applications. Ambul. Pediatr. 2, 330-336 (2002).
13. Basu A, Meltzer D. Implications of spillover effects within the family for medical cost-effectiveness analysis. J. Health Econ. 24, 751-773 (2005).
14. Tilford JM, Grosse SD, Robbins JM, Pyne JM, Cleves MA, Hobbs CA. Health state preference scores of children with spina bifida and their caregivers. Qual. Life Res. 14, 1087-1098 (2005).
15. Brouwer WBF, van Exel NJA, Tilford JM. Incorporating caregiver and family effects in economic evaluations of child health. In: Economic Evaluation in Child Health. Ungar W (Ed.). Oxford University Press, NY, USA 55-76 (2009).
16. Grosse SD, Teutsch SM, Haddix AC. Lessons from cost-effectiveness research for USA public health policy. Annu. Rev. Public Health 28, 365-391 (2007).
17. Grosse SD. Cost effectiveness as a criterion for newborn screening policy decisions: a critical review. In: Ethics and Newborn Genetic Screening: New Technologies, New Challenges. Baily MA, Murray T (Eds). Johns Hopkins University Press, MD, USA 58-88 (2009).
18. Grosse SD. Economic evaluations of newborn screening interventions. In: Economic Evaluation in Child Health. Ungar W (Ed.). Oxford University Press, NY, USA 113-132 (2009).
19. Grosse SD. Assessing the clinical utility of newborn screening. In: Human Genome Epidemiology (2nd Edition). Khoury MJ, Bedrosian S, Gwinn M, Higgins J, Ioannidis J, Little J (Eds). Oxford University Press, NY, USA 517-532 (2009).
20. Prosser LA, Ray GT, O'Brien M, Kleinman K, Santoli J, Lieu TA. Preferences and willingness to pay for health states prevented by pneumococcal conjugate vaccine. Pediatrics 113, 283-290 (2004).
21. Prosser LA, Kong CY, Rusinak D, Waisbren SL. Projected costs, risks, and benefits of expanded newborn screening for MCADD. Pediatrics 125, E286-E294 (2010).
22. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC (Eds). Oxford University Press, NY, USA (1996).
23. Rosenberg MD, Vig S. Intellectual disability/mental retardation. In: Child and Adolescent Neurology for Psychiatrists. Walker AM, Kaufman DM, Pfeffer CR, Solomon GE (Eds). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, PA, USA 243-264 (2008).
24. Norman R, Haas M, Wilcken B. International perspectives on the cost-effectiveness of tandem mass spectrometry for rare metabolic conditions. Health Policy 89, 252-260 (2009).
25. Langer A, John J. Neugeborenenscreening im Spannungsfeld der Gesundheitsökonomie. Monatsschr Kinderheilkd 157, 1230-1236 (2009).
26. Ray GT. Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine: review of cost-effectiveness studies in Australia, North America and Europe. Expert Rev. Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res. 8, 373-393 (2008).
27. Lieu TA, Ray GT, Black SB et al. Projected cost-effectiveness of pneumococcal conjugate vaccination of healthy infants and young children. JAMA 283, 1460-1468 (2000).
28. Brazier J, Ratcliffe J, Saloman JA, Tsuchiya A. Measuring and Valuing Health Benefits for Economic Evaluation. Oxford University Press, NY, USA (2007).
29. Torrance GW. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. J. Health Econ. 5, 1-30 (1986).
30. Feeny D, Furlong W, Boyle M et al. Multi-attribute health status classification systems: Health Utilities Index. Pharmacoeconomics 7, 490-502 (1995).
31. Dolan P. Output measures and valuation in health. In: Economic Evaluation in Health Care. Drummond MF, McGuire A (Eds). Oxford University Press, NY, USA 46-67 (2001).
32. Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann. Med. 33, 337-343 (2001).
33. Shaw JW, Johnson JA, Coons SJ. US valuation of the EQ-5D health states: development and testing of the D1 valuation model. Med. Care 43, 203-220 (2005).
34. Torrance GW, Feeny DH, Furlong WJ, Barr RD, Zhang Y, Wang Q. Multiattribute utility function for a comprehensive health status classification system. Health Utilities Index Mark 2. Med. Care 34, 702-722 (1996).
35. Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance GW et al. Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 system. Med. Care 40, 113-128 (2002).
36. Kaplan RM, Bush JW. Health-related quality of life measurement for evaluation research and policy analysis. Health Psychol. 1, 61-80 (1982).
37. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J. Health Econ. 21, 271-292 (2002).
38. Feeny D, Torrance GW, Labelle R. Integrating economic evaluations and quality of life assessments. In: Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials (2nd Edition). Spilker B (Ed.). Lippincott-Raven Press, PA, USA 85-95 (1996).
39. Neumann PJ, Sandberg PA, Araki SS, Kuntz KM, Feeny D, Weinstein MC. A comparison of HUI2 and HUI3 utility scores in Alzheimer's disease. Med. Decis. Making 20, 413-422 (2000).
40. Hatoum HT, Brazier JE, Akhras KS. Comparison of the HUI3 with the SF-36 preference based SF-6D in a clinical trial setting. Value Health 7, 602-609 (2004).
41. Joore M, Brunenberg D, Nelemans P et al. The impact of differences in EQ-5D and SF-6D utility scores on the acceptability of cost-utility ratios: results across five trial-based cost-utility studies. Value Health (2010) (In press).
42. Marra CA, Marion SA, Guh DP et al. Not all "quality-adjusted life years" are equal. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 60, 616-624 (2007).
43. Sach TH, Barton GR, Jenkinson C, Doherty M, Avery AJ, Muir KR. Comparing cost-utility estimates: does the choice of EQ-5D or SF-6D matter? Med. Care 47, 889-894 (2009).
44. Luo N, Johnson JA, Shaw JW, Feeny D, Coons SJ. Self-reported health status of the general adult U.S. population as assessed by the EQ-5D and Health Utilities Index. Med. Care 43, 1078-1086 (2005).
45. Fryback DG, Dunham NC, Palta M et al. US norms for six generic health-related quality-of-life indexes from the National Health Measurement study. Med. Care 45, 1162-1170 (2007).
46. Conner-Spady B, Suarez-Almazor ME. Variation in the estimation of quality-adjusted life-years by different preference-based instruments. Med. Care 41, 791-801 (2003).
47. Barton GR, Bankart J, Davis AC, Summerfield QA. Comparing utility scores before and after hearing-aid provision: results according to the EQ-5D, HUI3 and SF-6D. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy 3, 103-105 (2004).
48. Knies S, Evers SM, Candel MJ, Severens JL, Ament AJ. Utilities of the EQ-5D: transferable or not? Pharmacoeconomics 27, 767-779 (2009).
49. Norman R, Cronin P, Viney R, King M, Street D, Ratcliffe J. International comparisons in valuing EQ-5D health states: a review and analysis. Value Health (2010) (In press).
50. Noyes K, Dick AW, Holloway RG. The implications of using US-specific EQ-5D preference weights for cost-effectiveness evaluation. Med. Decis. Making 27, 327-334 (2007).
51. Smith-Olinde L, Grosse SD, Olinde F, Martin PF, Tilford JM. Health state preference scores for children with permanent childhood hearing loss: a comparative analysis of the QWB and HUI3. Qual. Life Res. 17, 943-953 (2008).
52. Saigal S, Feeny D, Rosenbaum P, Furlong W, Burrows E, Stoskopf B. Self-perceived health status and health-related quality of life of extremely low-birth-weight infants at adolescence. JAMA 276, 453-459 (1996).
53. Saigal S, Rosenbaum PL, Feeny D et al. Parental perspectives of the health status and health-related quality of life of teen-aged children who were extremely low birth weight and term controls. Pediatrics 105, 569-574 (2000).
54. Autti-Ramo I, Makela M, Sintonen H et al. Expanding screening for rare metabolic disease in the newborn: an analysis of costs, effect and ethical consequences for decision-making in Finland. Acta Paediatr. 94, 1126-1136 (2005).
55. Carroll AE, Downs SM. Comprehensive cost-utility analysis of newborn screening strategies. Pediatrics 117, 287-295 (2006).
56. Feuchtbaum L, Cunningham G. Economic evaluation of tandem mass spectrometry screening in California. Pediatrics 117, 280-286 (2006).
57. Insinga RP, Laessig RH, Hoffman GL. Newborn screening with tandem mass spectrometry: screening with tandem mass spectrometry: examining its cost-effectiveness in the Wisconsin Newborn Screening Panel. J. Pediatr. 141, 524-531 (2002).
58. Schoen EJ, Baker JC, Colby CJ, To TT. Cost-benefit analysis of universal tandem mass spectrometry for newborn screening. Pediatrics 110, 781-786 (2002).
59. Tran K, Banerjee S, Li H, Noorani HZ, Mensinkai S, Dooley K. Clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of newborn screening for medium chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency using tandem mass spectrometry. Clin. Biochem. 40, 235-241 (2007).
60. Venditti LN, Venditti CP, Berry GT et al. Newborn screening by tandem mass spectrometry for medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Pediatrics 112, 1005-1015 (2003).
61. Langfitt JT. Cost-effectiveness of anterotemporal lobectomy in medically intractable complex partial epilepsy. Epilepsia 38, 154-163 (1997).
62. Kallmes DF, Kallmes MH. Cost-effectiveness of angiography performed during surgery for ruptured intracranial aneurysms. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 18, 1453-1462 (1997).
63. Tran K, Banerjee S, Li H, Noorani HZ, Mensinkai S, Dooley K. Newborn Screening for Medium Chain Acyl-CoA Dehydrogenase Deficiency Using Tandem Mass Spectrometry: Clinical and Cost Effectiveness. Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment, Ottawa, Canada, Technology report no 62 (2006).
64. Bennett JE, Sumner W 2nd, Downs SM, Jaffe DM. Parents' utilities for outcomes of occult bacteremia. Arch. Pediatr. Adolesc. Med. 154, 43-48 (2000).
65. Grosse SD. Assessing cost effectiveness in health care: the history of the $50,000 per QALY threshold. Expert Rev. Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res. 8, 165-178 (2008).
66. Bridges JF, Onukwugha E, Mullins CD. Healthcare rationing by proxy: cost-effectiveness analysis and the misuse of the $50 000 threshold in the US. Pharmacoeconomics 28, 175-184 (2010).
67. Briggs AH, O'Brien BJ, Blackhouse G. Thinking outside the box: recent advances in the analysis and presentation of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness studies. Annu. Rev. Public Health 23, 377-401 (2002).
68. Groot Koerkamp B, Hunink MG, Stijnen T, Hammitt JK, Kuntz KM, Weinstein MC. Limitations of acceptability curves for presenting uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med. Decis. Making 27, 101-111 (2007).
69. Bergman A, Hjelmgren J, Ortqvist A et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of a universal vaccination programme with the 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV-7) in Sweden. Scand. J. Infect. Dis. 40, 721-729 (2008).
70. Wisløff T, Abrahamsen TG, Bergsaker MA et al. Cost effectiveness of adding 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate (PCV-7) vaccine to the Norwegian childhood vaccination program. Vaccine 24, 5690-5699 (2006).
71. Hubben GA, Bos JM, Glynn DM, van der Ende A, van Alphen L, Postma MJ. Enhanced decision support for policy makers using a web interface to health-economic models - illustrated with a cost-effectiveness analysis of nation-wide infant vaccination with the 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in The Netherlands. Vaccine 25, 3669-3678 (2007).
72. Bos JM, Rümke HC, Welte R, Postma MJ, Jager JC. Health economics of a hexavalent meningococcal outer-membrane vesicle vaccine in children: potential impact of introduction in the Dutch vaccination program. Vaccine 12, 202-207 (2001).
73. Ess SM, Schaad UB, Gervaix A, Pinösch S, Szucs TD. Cost-effectiveness of a pneumococcal conjugate immunisation program for infants in Switzerland. Vaccine 21, 3273-3281 (2003).
74. Trotter CL, Edmunds WJ. Reassessing the cost-effectiveness of meningococcal serogroup C conjugate (MCC) vaccines using a transmission dynamic model. Med. Decis. Making 26, 38-47 (2006).
75. Poirier B, De Wals P, Petit G, Erickson LJ, Pépin J. Cost-effectiveness of a 3-dose pneumococcal conjugate vaccine program in the province of Quebec, Canada. Vaccine 27, 7105-7109 (2009).
76. Salo H, Sintonen H, Nuorti JP et al. Economic evaluation of pneumococcal conjugate vaccination in Finland. Scand. J. Infect. Dis. 37, 821-832 (2005).
77. Ruedin HJ, Ess S, Zimmermann HP, Szucs T. Invasive meningococcal and pneumococcal disease in Switzerland: cost-utility analysis of different vaccine strategies. Vaccine 21, 4145-4152 (2003).
78. De Wals P, Petit G, Erickson LJ et al. Benefits and costs of immunization of children with pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in Canada. Vaccine 21, 3757-3764 (2003).
79. Bos JM, Rümke HC, Welte R, Postma MJ. Epidemiologic impact and cost-effectiveness of universal infant vaccination with a 7-valent conjugated pneumococcal vaccine in the Netherlands. Clin. Ther. 25, 2614-2630 (2003).
80. Bos JM, Rümke HC, Welte R, Spanjaard L, van Alphen L, Postma MJ. Combination vaccine against invasive meningococcal B and pneumococcal infections: potential epidemiological and economic impact in the Netherlands. Pharmacoeconomics 24, 141-153 (2006).
81. Melegaro A, Edmunds WJ. Cost-effectiveness analysis of pneumococcal conjugate vaccination in England and Wales. Vaccine 22, 4203-4214 (2004).
82. Oostenbrink R, Oostenbrink JB, Moons KG et al. Cost-utility analysis of patient care in children with meningeal signs. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care 18, 485-496 (2002).
83. Shepard CW, Ortega-Sanchez IR, Scott RD, Rosenstein NE. ABCs team. Cost-effectiveness of conjugate meningococcal vaccination strategies in the United States. Pediatrics 115, 1220-1232 (2005).
84. Zhou F, Bisgard KM, Yusuf HR, Deuson RR, Bath SK, Murphy TV. Impact of universal Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccination starting at 2 months of age in the United States: an economic analysis. Pediatrics 110, 653-661 (2002).
85. Torrance GW, Boyle MH, Horwood SP. Application of multi-attribute utility theory to measure social preferences for health states. Oper. Res. 30, 1043-1069 (1982).
86. Livartowski A, Boucher J, Detournay B, Reinert P. Cost-effectiveness evaluation of vaccination against Haemophilus influenzae invasive disease in France. Vaccine 14, 495-500 (1996).
87. Cheng AK, Rubin HR, Powe NR, Mellon NK, Francis HW, Niparko JK. Cost-utility analysis of the cochlear implant in children. JAMA 284, 850-856 (2000).
88. Krabbe PFM, Hinderink JB, van den Broek P. The effect of cochlear implant use in postlingually deaf adults. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care 16, 864-873 (2000).
89. Stouthard MEA, Esselink-Bot ML, van Bonsel G et al. Weighing Factors For Diseases in The Netherlands. Institute for Social Health Care, Amsterdam Medical Center. Amsterdam, The Netherlands (1997).
90. Stouthard MEA, Essink-Bot ML, Bonsel GJ; Dutch Disability Weights (DDW) Group. Disability weights for diseases. A modified protocol and results for a Western European region. Eur. J. Public Health 10, 24-30 (2000).
91. Oostenbrink R, A Moll HA, Essink-Bot ML. The EQ-5D and the Health Utilities Index for permanent sequelae after meningitis: a head-to-head comparison. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 55, 791-799 (2002).
92. Barton GR, Stacey PC, Fortnum HM, Summerfield AQ. Hearing-impaired children in the United Kingdom, IV: cost-effectiveness of pediatric cochlear implantation. Ear Hear. 27, 575-588 (2006).
93. Petrou S, McCann D, Law CM, Watkin PM, Worsfold S, Kennedy CR. Health status and health-related quality of life preference-based outcomes of children who are aged 7 to 9 years and have bilateral permanent childhood hearing impairment. Pediatrics 120, 1044-1052 (2007).
94. Barton GR, Bankart J, Davis AC. A comparison of the quality of life of hearing-impaired people as estimated by three different utility measures. Int. J. Audiol. 44, 157-163 (2005).
95. Ortega-Sanchez IR, Meltzer MI, Shepard C et al. Economics of an adolescent meningococcal conjugate vaccination catch-up campaign in the United States. Clin. Infect. Dis. 46, 1-13 (2008).
96. Gudex C, Kind P. The QALY Toolkit. Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK, Discussion paper no.38 (1988).
97. Petrou S. Should health gains by children be given the same value as health gains by adults in an economic evaluation framework? In: Economic Evaluation in Child Health. Ungar W (Ed.). Oxford University Press, NY, USA 271-287 (2009).
98. Tarride JE, Burke N, Bischof M et al. A review of health utilities across conditions common in paediatric and adult populations. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 8, 12 (2010).
99. Griffin S, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Decision analysis for resource allocation in health care. J. Health Serv. Res. Policy 13, 23-30 (2008).
100. Bell CM, Urbach DR, Ray JG et al. Bias in published cost effectiveness studies: systematic review. BMJ 332, 699-703 (2006).
101. Warner KE, Smith RJ, Smith DG, Fries BE. Health and economic implications of a work-site smoking-cessation program: a simulation analysis. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 38, 981-992 (1996).
102. Valuing Health for Regulatory Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Institute of Medicine, Miller W, Robinson LA, Lawrence RS (Eds). National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USA (2006).
103. Lipscomb J, Drummond M, Fryback D, Gold M, Revicki D. Retaining, and enhancing, the QALY. Value Health 12, S18-S26 (2009).
104. Drummond M, Brixner D, Gold M et al. Toward a consensus on the QALY. Value Health 12, S31-S35 (2009).
105. Sullivan PW, Lawrence WF Jr, Ghushchyan V. A national catalogue of preference-based scores for chronic conditions in the U.S. Med. Care 43, 736-749 (2005).
106. Sullivan PW, Ghushchyan V. Preference-based EQ-5D index scores for chronic conditions in the United States. Med. Decis. Making 26, 410-420 (2006).
107. Revicki DA. National health preference data: a useful resource for health services research. Med. Decis. Making 26, 310-312 (2006).
108. Franks P, Hanmer J, Fryback DG. Relative disutilities of 47 risk factors and conditions assessed with seven preference-based health status measures in a national U.S. sample: toward consistency in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med. Care 44, 478-485 (2006).
109. Fu AZ, Kattan MW. Utilities should not be multiplied: evidence from the preference-based scores in the United States. Med. Care 46, 984-990 (2008).
110. Prosser LA. Current challenges and future research in measuring preferences for pediatric health outcomes. J. Pediatr. 155, 7-9 (2009).
111. Fryback DG, Lawrence WF, Martin PA, Klein R, Klein BE. Predicting quality of well-being scores from the SF-36: results from the Beaver Dam Health Outcomes Study. Med. Decis. Making 17, 1-9 (1997).
112. Revicki DA, Kawata AK, Harnam N, Chen WH, Hays RD, Cella D. Predicting EuroQol (EQ-5D) scores from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global items and domain item banks in a United States sample. Qual. Life Res. 18, 783-791 (2009).
113. Fryback DG, Palta M, Cherepanov D, Bolt D, Kim JS. Comparison of 5 health-related quality-of-life indexes using item response theory analysis. Med. Decis. Making 30, 5-15 (2010).
114. Ladapo JA, Neumann PJ, Keren R, Prosser LA. Valuing children's health: a comparison of cost-utility analyses for adult and paediatric health interventions in the US. Pharmacoeconomics 25, 817-828 (2007).
115. Economic Evaluation in Child Health. Ungar W (Ed.). Oxford University Press, NY, USA (2009).
116. Pickard A, Kohlmann T, Janssen M et al. Evaluating equivalency between response systems: application of the Rasch model to 3-level and 5-level EQ-5D. Med. Care 45, 812-819 (2007).
117. CEA Registry www.cearegistry.org
118. CRD. CRD databases www.crd.york.ac.uk/crdweb/Home.aspx?S essionID=&SearchID=&E=0&D=0&H= 0&SearchFor
119. SickKids. Search the PEDE database http://pede.ccb.sickkids.ca/pede/ index.jsp
120. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal (2008) www.nice.org.uk/media/B52/A7/ TAMethodsGuideUpdatedJune2008.pdf (Accessed 12 December 2009)
121. Health Care Insurance Board. Guidelines for pharmacoeconomic research, updated version. College voor zorgverzekeringen, Diemen, The Netherlands (2006) www.ispor.org/PEguidelines/source/ HTAGuidelinesNLupdated2006.pdf (Accessed 28 March 2010)
122. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies: Canada (3rd Edition). Ottawa, Canada (2006) www.cadth.ca/media/pdf/186- EconomicGuidelines-e.pdf (Accessed 12 December 2009)
123. Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care. General methods for the assessment of the relation of benefits to costs, version 1.0 (2009) www.iqwig.de/download/General- Methods-for-the-Assessment-of-the- Relation-of-Benefits-to-Costs.pdf (Accessed 12 December 2009)
124. Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. Guidelines for preparing submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, version 4.3 (2008) www.health.gov.au/internet/main/ publishing.nsf/content/AECB791C294829 20CA25724400188EDB/$File/ PBAC4.3.2(01DEC08).pdf (Accessed 12 December 2009)
125. International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. Pharmacoeconomic guidelines www.ispor.org/PEguidelines/index.asp
126. Lieu T, Meltzer MI, Messonnier ML. Guidance for health economics studies presented to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA (2008) www.cdc.gov/vaccines/ recs/acip/ economic-studies.htm (Accessed 11 February 2010)