How to Present a Decision Object in Health Preference Research: Attributes and Levels, the Decision Model, and the Descriptive Framework.

In health preference research (HPR) studies, data are generated by participants'/subjects' decisions. When developing an HPR study, it is therefore important to have a clear understanding of the components of a decision and how those components stimulate participant behavior. To obtain valid and reliable results, study designers must sufficiently describe the decision model and its components. HPR studies require a detailed examination of the decision criteria, detailed documentation of the descriptive framework, and specification of hypotheses. The objects that stimulate subjects' decisions in HPR studies are defined by attributes and attribute levels. Any limitations in the identification and presentation of attributes and levels can negatively affect preference elicitation, the quality of the HPR data, and study results. This practical guide shows how to link the HPR question to an underlying decision model. It covers how to (1) construct a descriptive framework that presents relevant characteristics of a decision object and (2) specify the research hypotheses. The paper outlines steps and available methods to achieve all this, including the methods' advantages and limitations.

Detection and Control of Pregnancy Hypertension Using Self-Monitoring of Blood Pressure With Automated Telemonitoring: Cost Analyses of the BUMP Randomized Trials.

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy hypertension continues to cause maternal and perinatal morbidity. Two linked UK randomized trials showed adding self-monitoring of blood pressure (SMBP) with automated telemonitoring to usual antenatal care did not result in earlier detection or better control of pregnancy hypertension. This article reports the trials' integrated cost analyses. METHODS: Two cost analyses. SMBP with usual care was compared with usual care alone in pregnant individuals at risk of hypertension (BUMP 1 trial [Blood Pressure Monitoring in High Risk Pregnancy to Improve the Detection and Monitoring of Hypertension], n=2441) and with hypertension (BUMP 2 trial, n=850). Clinical notes review identified participant-level antenatal, intrapartum, and postnatal care and these were costed. Comparisons between trial arms used means and 95% CIs. Within BUMP 2, chronic and gestational hypertension cohorts were analyzed separately. Telemonitoring system costs were reported separately. RESULTS: In BUMP 1, mean (SE) total costs with SMBP and with usual care were £7200 (£323) and £7063 (£245), respectively, mean difference (95% CI), £151 (-£633 to £936). For the BUMP 2 chronic hypertension cohort, corresponding figures were £13 384 (£1230), £12 614 (£1081), mean difference £323 (-£2904 to £3549) and for the gestational hypertension cohort were £11 456 (£901), £11 145 (£959), mean difference £41 (-£2486 to £2567). The per-person cost of telemonitoring was £6 in BUMP 1 and £29 in BUMP 2. CONCLUSIONS: SMBP was not associated with changes in the cost of health care contacts for individuals at risk of, or with, pregnancy hypertension. This is reassuring as SMBP in pregnancy is widely prevalent, particularly because of the COVID-19 pandemic. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03334149.

Psychometric Performance Comparison of the Adapted versus Original Versions of the EQ-5D-Y-3L and -Y-5L in Proxy Respondents for 2- to 4-Year-Olds.

INTRODUCTION: Few preference-weighted instruments are available to measure health-related quality of life in young children (2-4 years of age). The EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L were recently modified for this purpose. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test the psychometric properties of these adapted versions for use with parent proxies of children aged 2-4 years and to compare their performance with the original versions. It was hypothesised that the adapted instrument wording would result in improved psychometric performance. METHODS: Survey data of children aged 2-4 years were obtained from the Australian Paediatric Multi-Instrument Comparison study. Distributional and psychometric properties tested included feasibility, convergence, distribution of level scores, ceiling effects, known-group validity (Cohen's D effect sizes for prespecified groups defined by the presence/absence of special healthcare needs [SHCNs]), test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICCs]), and responsiveness (standardised response mean [SRM] effect sizes for changes in health). Level sum scores were used to provide summary outcomes. Supplementary analysis using utility scores (from the Swedish EQ-5D-Y-3L value set) were conducted for the adapted and original EQ-5D-Y-3L, and no value sets were available for the EQ-5D-Y-5L. RESULTS: A total of 842 parents of children aged 2-4 years completed the survey. All instruments were easy to complete. There was strong convergence between the adapted and original EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L. The adapted EQ-5D-Y-3L and adapted EQ-5D-Y-5L showed more responses in the severe levels of the five EQ-5D-Y dimensions, particularly in the usual activity and mobility dimensions (EQ-5D-Y-5L: mobility level 1: adapted n = 478 [83%], original n = 253 [94%]; mobility level 4/5: adapted n = 17 [2.9%], original n = 4 [1.5%)]). The difference in the distribution of responses was more evident in children with SHCNs. Assessment of known-group validity showed a greater effect size for the adapted EQ-5D-Y-3L and adapted EQ-5D-Y-5L compared with the original instruments (EQ-5D-Y-5L: adapted Cohen's D = 1.01, original Cohen's D = 0.83) between children with and without SHCNs. The adapted EQ-5D-Y-3L and adapted EQ-5D-Y-5L showed improved reliability at 4-week follow-up, with improved ICCs (EQ-5D-Y-5L: adapted ICC = 0.83, original ICC = 0.44). The responsiveness of all instruments moved in the hypothesised direction for better or worse health at follow-up. Probability of superiority analysis showed little/no differences between the adapted and original EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L. Supplementary psychometric analysis of the adapted and original EQ-5D-Y-3L using utilities showed comparable findings with analyses using level sum scores. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest improved psychometric performance of the adapted version of the EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L in children aged 2-4 years compared with the original versions.

Digital thErapy For Improved tiNnitus carE Study (DEFINE): Protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Tinnitus is a common health condition, affecting approximately 15% of the UK population. The tinnitus treatment with the strongest evidence base is Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT), with standard tinnitus therapy typically augmented with education, relaxation and other techniques. Availability of CBT and conventional tinnitus therapy more broadly is limited for tinnitus sufferers. The DEFINE trial aims to assess whether smartphone-delivered tinnitus therapy, the Oto app, is as effective as current standard care, one-to-one therapist-delivered tinnitus treatment for the treatment of tinnitus in adults. The trial is registered in the ISRCTN Registry: ISRCTN99577932. DEFINE is an open-label, non-inferiority, prospective, parallel design, randomised-controlled trial. Recruitment, interventions and assessments will be remote, enabling UK-wide participant involvement. 198 participants aged 18 years or more will be recruited via social media advertisement or via primary care physicians. A screening process will identify those with tinnitus that impacts health-related quality of life, and following consent smartphone-based audiometry will be performed. Randomisation 1:1 to the Oto app or one-to-one therapist-led tinnitus therapy will be performed centrally by computer, matching groups for age, sex and hearing level. Following participant allocation, the Oto app will be provided for immediate use, or a one-to-one remote therapy appointment booked to occur within approximately 1 week, with up to 6 sessions delivered. Participant outcomes will be collected at 4,12, 26 and 52 weeks via questionnaire and phone call. The primary outcome is the change in Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI) total score measured at 26 weeks following allocation. Adverse events will be recorded. A health economic evaluation in the form of a cost-utility analysis will be performed using data from participant submitted EuroQol 5D-5L and Health Utilities Index Mark 3 scores and resource use data. Trial results will be made publicly available, including a plain English summary.

Defining treatment success in children with surgical conditions.

OBJECTIVES: Develop a score summarising how successfully a child with any surgical condition has been treated, and test the clinical validity of the score. DESIGN: Discrete choice experiment (DCE), and secondary analysis of data from six UK-wide prospective cohort studies. PARTICIPANTS: 253 people with lived experience of childhood surgical conditions, 114 health professionals caring for children with surgical conditions and 753 members of the general population completed the DCE. Data from 1383 children with surgical conditions were used in the secondary analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Normalised importance value of attribute (NIVA) for number/type of operations, hospital-treated infections, quality of life and duration of survival (reference attribute). RESULTS: Quality of life and duration of survival were the most important attributes in deciding whether a child had been successfully treated. Parents, carers and previously treated adults placed equal weight on both attributes (NIVA=0.996; 0.798 to 1.194). Healthcare professionals placed more weight on quality of life (NIVA=1.469; 0.950 to 1.987). The general population placed more weight on survival (NIVA=0.823; 95% CI 0.708 to 0.938). The resulting score (the Children's Surgery Outcome Reporting (CSOR) Treatment Success Score (TSS)) has the best possible value of 1, a value of 0 describes palliation and values less than 0 describe outcomes worse than palliation. CSOR TSSs varied clinically appropriately for infants whose data were included in the UK-wide cohort studies. CONCLUSIONS: The CSOR TSS summarises how successfully children with surgical conditions have been treated, and can therefore be used to compare hospitals' observed and expected outcomes.

Child health valuation protocol for a discrete choice experiment comparing paired comparison and kaizen tasks and estimating US EQ-5D-Y-3L values on an experience scale.

INTRODUCTION: A decade ago, the first national valuation study of the EQ-5D-Y-3L (Y-3L) involved a discrete choice experiment (DCE) that asked 4155 US adult respondents to complete 40 paired comparisons, choosing between two dying children. Instead of choosing between dying children, the respondents in this novel protocol are asked whether 'being in a coma' is better or worse than experiencing 'health problems' (ie, experience scale) and how they would relieve health problems (ie, kaizen tasks). Our aims are to compare the preference evidence of the paired comparison and kaizen tasks and to conduct a DCE for the valuation of Y-3L profiles on an experience scale. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Under this protocol, we will conduct an online survey that collects preference evidence from 600 US adult respondents on the health of a 10-year-old child for a week. Across all scenarios, each child will be described as either being 'in a coma' or having 'health problems', namely five three-level attributes (Y-3L). In this DCE, each respondent will be randomly assigned to one of four D-efficient blocks, including five coma comparisons (ie, Y-3L vs coma), 10 paired comparisons (Y-3L vs Y-3L) and 10 kaizen tasks (preference paths). In addition to comparing evidence by task (aim 2), the analysis plan includes the estimation of main-effects conditional logit models to create a Y-3L value set on an 'experience scale' where positive (negative) experiences have positive (negative) values (0 is 'being in a coma' and 1 is full health). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The institutional review board (IRB) (Advarra) determined that this project (Pro00072276) is exempt from IRB oversight based on DHHS 45 CFR 46.104(d)(2) and is not subject to requirements for continuing review. The results will be prepared for publication in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings. The data and code will be made available on reasonable request.

Long-term healthcare utilization and costs of babies born after assisted reproductive technologies (ART): a record linkage study with 10-years' follow-up in England.

STUDY QUESTION: Is the long-term health care utilization of children born after ART more costly to the healthcare system in England than children born to mothers with no fertility problems? SUMMARY ANSWER: Children born after ART had significantly more general practitioner (GP) consultations and higher primary care costs up to 10 years after birth, and significantly higher hospital admission costs in the first year after birth, compared to children born to mothers with no fertility problems. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: There is evidence that children born after ART are at an increased risk of adverse birth outcomes and a small increased risk of rare adverse outcomes in childhood. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We conducted a longitudinal study of 368 088 mother and baby pairs in England using a bespoke linked dataset. Singleton babies born 1997-2018, and their mothers, who were registered at GP practices in England contributing data to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), were identified through the CPRD GOLD mother-baby dataset; this data was augmented with further linkage to the mothers' Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) Register data. Four groups of babies were identified through the mothers' records: a 'fertile' comparison group, an 'untreated sub-fertile' group, an 'ovulation induction' group, and an ART group. Babies were followed-up from birth to 28 February 2021, unless censored due to loss to follow-up (e.g. leaving GP practice, emigration) or death. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The CPRD collects anonymized coded patient electronic health records from a network of GPs in the UK. We estimated primary care costs and hospital admission costs for babies in the four fertility groups using the CPRD GOLD data and the linked Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) Admitted Patient Care (APC) data. Linear regression was used to compare the care costs in the different groups. Inverse probability weights were generated and applied to adjust for potential bias caused by attrition due to loss to follow-up. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Children born to mothers with no fertility problems had significantly fewer consultations and lower primary care costs compared to the other groups throughout the 10-years' follow up. Regarding hospital costs, children born after ART had significantly higher hospital admission costs in the first year after birth compared to those born to mothers with no fertility problems (difference = £307 (95% CI: 153, 477)). The same pattern was observed in children born after untreated subfertility and ovulation induction. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: HFEA linkage uses non-donor data cycles only, and the introduction of consent for data use reduced the availability of HFEA records after 2009. The fertility groups were derived by augmenting HFEA data with evidence from primary care records; however, there remains some potential misclassification of exposure groups. The cost of neonatal critical care is not captured in the HES APC data, which may cause underestimation of the cost differences between the comparison group and the infertility groups. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The findings can help anticipate the financial impact on the healthcare system associated with subfertility and ART, particularly as the demand for these treatments grows. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): C.C. and this work were funded by a UK Medical Research Council Career Development Award [MR/L019671/1] and a UK MRC Transition Support Award [MR/W029286/1]. X.H. is an Australia National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Emerging Leadership Fellow [grant number 2009253]. The authors declare no competing interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Frenotomy with breastfeeding support versus breastfeeding support alone for infants with tongue-tie and breastfeeding difficulties: the FROSTTIE RCT.

Background: Tongue-tie can be diagnosed in 3-11% of babies, with some studies reporting almost universal breastfeeding difficulties, and others reporting very few feeding difficulties that relate to the tongue-tie itself, instead noting that incorrect positioning and attachment are the primary reasons behind the observed breastfeeding difficulties and not the tongue-tie itself. The only existing trials of frenotomy are small and underpowered and/or include only very short-term or subjective outcomes. Objective: To investigate whether frenotomy is clinically and cost-effective to promote continuation of breastfeeding at 3 months in infants with breastfeeding difficulties diagnosed with tongue-tie. Design: A multicentre, unblinded, randomised, parallel group controlled trial. Setting: Twelve infant feeding services in the UK. Participants: Infants aged up to 10 weeks referred to an infant feeding service (by a parent, midwife or other breastfeeding support service) with breastfeeding difficulties and judged to have tongue-tie. Interventions: Infants were randomly allocated to frenotomy with standard breastfeeding support or standard breastfeeding support without frenotomy. Main outcome measures: Primary outcome was any breastmilk feeding at 3 months according to maternal self-report. Secondary outcomes included mother's pain, exclusive breastmilk feeding, exclusive direct breastfeeding, frenotomy, adverse events, maternal anxiety and depression, maternal and infant NHS health-care resource use, cost-effectiveness, and any breastmilk feeding at 6 months of age. Results: Between March 2019 and November 2020, 169 infants were randomised, 80 to the frenotomy with breastfeeding support arm and 89 to the breastfeeding support arm from a planned sample size of 870 infants. The trial was stopped in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic due to withdrawal of breastfeeding support services, slow recruitment and crossover between arms. In the frenotomy with breastfeeding support arm 74/80 infants (93%) received their allocated intervention, compared to 23/89 (26%) in the breastfeeding support arm. Primary outcome data were available for 163/169 infants (96%). There was no evidence of a difference between the arms in the rate of breastmilk feeding at 3 months, which was high in both groups (67/76, 88% vs. 75/87, 86%; adjusted risk ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 1.16). Adverse events were reported for three infants after surgery [bleeding (n = 1), salivary duct damage (n = 1), accidental cut to the tongue and salivary duct damage (n = 1)]. Cost-effectiveness could not be determined with the information available. Limitations: The statistical power of the analysis was extremely limited due to not achieving the target sample size and the high proportion of infants in the breastfeeding support arm who underwent frenotomy. Conclusions: This trial does not provide sufficient information to assess whether frenotomy in addition to breastfeeding support improves breastfeeding rates in infants diagnosed with tongue-tie. Future work: There is a clear lack of equipoise in the UK concerning the use of frenotomy, however, the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the procedure still need to be established. Other study designs will need to be considered to address this objective. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN 10268851. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Programme (project number 16/143/01) and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 11. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The funder had no role in study design or data collection, analysis and interpretation. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Many mothers and babies experience difficulties in establishing breastfeeding. In some babies it is thought that their difficulties may be linked to a condition called tongue-tie, in which a piece of skin tightly joins the middle part of the underside of the tongue to the base of the baby's mouth. This can be treated by an operation to divide the tight part/skin in the middle of the underneath of the tongue. We planned to carry out a trial of 870 babies to find out whether an operation together with breastfeeding support helps more mothers and babies with tongue-tie to continue breastfeeding until the baby is 3 months old compared to breastfeeding support on its own and whether the costs were different between the two groups of mothers and babies. We were only able to recruit 169 babies as the trial was stopped because of slow recruitment, changes to services in the COVID-19 pandemic and a high proportion of the babies in the breastfeeding support group going on to have an operation. There were no differences in the rate of breastfeeding at 3 months between the babies in the group who had an operation straightaway and those in the group that had breastfeeding support alone, or had an operation later. More than four in every five babies in both groups were still breastmilk feeding at 3 months. Three babies who had an operation, around 1 in 50 babies, had a complication of the operation (bleeding, scarring or a cut to the tube that makes saliva). Because of the small size of the study, we cannot say whether an operation to divide a tongue-tie along with breastfeeding support helps babies with tongue-tie and breastfeeding difficulties or has different costs. We will need to try different types of research to answer the question.

A treatment strategy with nifedipine versus labetalol for women with pregnancy hypertension: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (Giant PANDA).

BACKGROUND: Approximately one in ten women have high blood pressure during pregnancy. Hypertension is associated with adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes, and as treatment improves maternal outcomes, antihypertensive treatment is recommended. Previous trials have been unable to provide a definitive answer on which antihypertensive treatment is associated with optimal maternal and neonatal outcomes and the need for robust evidence evaluating maternal and infant benefits and risks remains an important, unanswered question for research and clinical communities. METHODS: The Giant PANDA study is a pragmatic, open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial of a treatment initiation strategy with nifedipine (calcium channel blocker), versus labetalol (mixed alpha/beta blocker) in 2300 women with pregnancy hypertension. The primary objective is to evaluate if treatment with nifedipine compared to labetalol in women with pregnancy hypertension reduces severe maternal hypertension without increasing fetal or neonatal death or neonatal unit admission. Subgroup analyses will be undertaken by hypertension type (chronic, gestational, pre-eclampsia), diabetes (yes, no), singleton (yes, no), self-reported ethnicity (Black, all other), and gestational age at randomisation categories (11 + 0 to 19 + 6, 20 + 0 to 27 + 6, 28 + 0 to 34 + 6 weeks). A cost-effectiveness analysis using an NHS perspective will be undertaken using a cost-consequence analysis up to postnatal hospital discharge and an extrapolation exercise with a lifetime horizon conditional on the results of the cost-consequence analysis. DISCUSSION: This trial aims to address the uncertainty of which antihypertensive treatment is associated with optimal maternal and neonatal outcomes. The trial results are intended to provide definitive evidence to inform guidelines and linked, shared decision-making tools, thus influencing clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number: 2020-003410-12, ISRCTN: 12,792,616 registered on 18 November 2020.

A Qualitative Investigation to Develop an Adapted Version of the EQ-5D-Y-3L for Use in Children Aged 2-4 Years.

OBJECTIVES: Few preference-weighted health-related quality-of-life measures exist for children under 5 years of age. Young children are substantial consumers of healthcare services. This project aims to assess EQ-5D-Y-3L's appropriateness in children aged 2 to 4 years and to coproduce with parents a suitable adaptation. METHODS: Purposive sampling at the Murdoch Children's Research Institute and Royal Children's Hospital was used to recruit parents or carers of children aged 2 to 4 years in Australia. Online focus groups were conducted consisting of 13 parents of healthy children, and 6 parents of children with moderate to severe health conditions. Parents provided feedback on each dimension of the proxy EQ-5D-Y-3L. Recordings were transcribed and thematic analysis was conducted. Qualitative findings guided the design of adaptations to the instrument. The adaptations were piloted to obtain feedback and refined to improve language translatability and comparability with other EuroQol instruments. RESULTS: The adapted EQ-5D-Y-3L was considered generally acceptable by the parents. Parents provided a wide range of examples of how each domain related to their children, with varied examples provided across ages 2 to 4 years and health status. Additional or alternative wording was suggested by parents to improve the applicability of the instrument to this age group. One example of this was the change of the domain wording "walking about" to "movement"-ID5:"In this age group, movement is more important than walking." CONCLUSIONS: The adapted EQ-5D-Y-3L has improved relevance for 2-4-year olds and appears easy to complete. Further testing of the adapted instrument is required to evaluate acceptability, reliability, and validity.

Neonatal health care costs of very preterm babies in England: a retrospective analysis of a national birth cohort.

OBJECTIVES: Babies born between 27+0 and 31+6 weeks of gestation represent the largest group of very preterm babies requiring National Health Service (NHS) care; however, up-to-date, cost figures for the UK are not currently available. This study estimates neonatal costs to hospital discharge for this group of very preterm babies in England. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of resource use data recorded within the National Neonatal Research Database. SETTING: Neonatal units in England. PATIENTS: Babies born between 27+0 and 31+6 weeks of gestation in England and discharged from a neonatal unit between 2014 and 2018. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Days receiving different levels of neonatal care were costed, along with other specialised clinical activities. Mean resource use and costs per baby are presented by gestational age at birth, along with total costs for the cohort. RESULTS: Based on data for 28 154 very preterm babies, the annual total costs of neonatal care were estimated to be £262 million, with 96% of costs attributable to routine daily care provided by units. The mean (SD) total cost per baby of this routine care varied by gestational age at birth; £75 594 (£34 874) at 27 weeks as compared with £27 401 (£14 947) at 31 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Neonatal healthcare costs for very preterm babies vary substantially by gestational age at birth. The findings presented here are a useful resource to stakeholders including NHS managers, clinicians, researchers and policymakers.

Gestational age and hospital admission costs from birth to childhood: a population-based record linkage study in England.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between gestational age at birth and hospital admission costs from birth to 8 years of age. DESIGN: Population-based, record linkage, cohort study in England. SETTING: National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England, UK. PARTICIPANTS: 1 018 136 live, singleton births in NHS hospitals in England between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2006. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hospital admission costs from birth to age 8 years, estimated by gestational age at birth (<28, 28-29, 30-31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 and 42 weeks). RESULTS: Both birth admission and subsequent admission hospital costs decreased with increasing gestational age at birth. Differences in hospital admission costs between gestational age groups diminished with increasing age, particularly after the first 2 years following birth. Children born extremely preterm (<28 weeks) and very preterm (28-31 weeks) still had higher average hospital admission costs (£699 (95% CI £419 to £919) for <28 weeks; £434 (95% CI £305 to £563) for 28-31 weeks) during the eighth year of life compared with children born at 40 weeks (£109, 95% CI £104 to £114). Children born extremely preterm had the highest 8-year cumulative hospital admission costs per child (£80 559 (95% CI £79 238 to £82 019)), a large proportion of which was incurred during the first year after birth (£71 997 (95% CI £70 866 to £73 097)). CONCLUSIONS: The association between gestational age at birth and hospital admission costs persists into mid-childhood. The study results provide a useful costing resource for future economic evaluations focusing on preventive and treatment strategies for babies born preterm.

Test-Retest Reliability of EQ-5D-Y-3L Best-Worst Scaling Choices of Adolescents and Adults.

BACKGROUND: There is an increasing interest to obtain adolescents' own health state valuation preferences and to understand how these differ from adult preferences for the same health state. An important question in health state valuation is whether adolescents can report preferences reliably, yet research remains limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the test-retest reliability of best-worst scaling (BWS) to elicit adolescent preferences compared with adults. METHODS: Identical BWS tasks designed to value 3-level version of EQ-5D-Y health states were administered online in samples of 1000 adolescents (aged 11-17 years) and 1006 adults in Spain. The valuation survey was repeated approximately 3 days later. We calculated (1) simple percentage agreement and (2) kappa statistic as measures of test-retest reliability. We also compared BWS marginal frequencies and relative attribute importance between baseline and follow-up to explore similarities in the obtained preferences. RESULTS: We found that both adolescents and adults were able to report their preferences with moderate reliability (kappa: 0.46 for adolescents, 0.46 for adults) for best choices and fair to moderate reliability (kappa: 0.39 for adolescents, 0.41 for adults) for worst choices. No notable difference was observed across years of child age. Higher consistency was observed for best choices than worst in some dimensions for both populations. No significant differences were found in the relative attribute importance between baseline and follow-up in both populations. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that BWS is a reliable elicitation technique to value 3-level version of EQ-5D-Y health states in both adolescents and adults.

The Use of Multicriteria Decision Analysis to Support Decision Making in Healthcare: An Updated Systematic Literature Review.

OBJECTIVES: Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) is increasingly used for decision making in healthcare. However, its application in different decision-making contexts is still unclear. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive review of MCDA studies performed to inform decisions in healthcare and to summarize its application in different decision contexts. METHODS: We updated a systematic review conducted in 2013 by searching Embase, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar for MCDA studies in healthcare, published in English between August 2013 and November 2020. We also expanded the search by reviewing grey literature found via Trip Medical Database and Google, published between January 1990 and November 2020. A comprehensive template was developed to extract information about the decision context, criteria, methods, stakeholders involved, and sensitivity analyses conducted. RESULTS: From the 4295 identified studies, 473 studies were eligible for full-text review after assessing titles and abstracts. Of those, 228 studies met the inclusion criteria and underwent data extraction. The use of MCDA continues to grow in healthcare literature, with most of the studies (49%) informing priority-setting decisions. Safety, cost, and quality of care delivery are the most frequently used criteria, although there are considerable differences across decision contexts. Almost half of the MCDA studies used the linear additive model whereas scales and the analytical hierarchy process were the most used techniques for scoring and weighting, respectively. Not all studies report on each one of the MCDA steps, consider axiomatic properties, or justify the methods used. CONCLUSIONS: A guide on how to conduct and report MCDA that acknowledges the particularities of the different decision contexts and methods needs to be developed.

The impact of ultrasound-based antenatal screening strategies to detect vasa praevia in the United Kingdom: An exploratory study using decision analytic modelling methods.

The objective of this exploratory modelling study was to estimate the effects of second-trimester, ultrasound-based antenatal detection strategies for vasa praevia (VP) in a hypothetical cohort of pregnant women. For this, a decision-analytic tree model was developed covering four discrete detection pathways/strategies: no screening; screening targeted at women undergoing in-vitro fertilisation (IVF); screening targeted at women with low-lying placentas (LLP); screening targeted at women with velamentous cord insertion (VCI) or a bilobed or succenturiate (BL/S) placenta. Main outcome measures were the number of referrals to transvaginal sonography (TVS), diagnosed and undiagnosed cases of VP, overdetected cases of VCI, and VP-associated perinatal mortality. The greatest number of referrals to TVS occurred in the LLP-based (2,083) and VCI-based screening (1,319) pathways. These two pathways also led to the highest proportions of pregnancies diagnosed with VP (VCI-based screening: 552 [78.9% of all pregnancies]; LLP-based: 371 [53.5%]) and the lowest proportions of VP leading to perinatal death (VCI-based screening: 100 [14.2%]; LLP-based: 196 [28.0%]). In contrast, the IVF-based pathway resulted in 66 TVS referrals, 50 VP diagnoses (7.1% of all VP pregnancies), and 368 (52.6%) VP-associated perinatal deaths which was comparable to the no screening pathway (380 [54.3%]). The VCI-based pathway resulted in the greatest detection of VCI (14,238 [99.1%]), followed by the IVF-based pathway (443 [3.1%]); no VCI detection occurred in the LLP-based or no screening pathways. In conclusion, the model results suggest that a targeted LLP-based approach could detect a substantial proportion of VP cases, while avoiding VCI overdetection and requiring minimal changes to current clinical practice. High-quality data is required to explore the clinical and cost-effectiveness of this and other detection strategies further. This is necessary to provide a robust basis for future discussion about routine screening for VP.

Analytical Considerations When Anchoring Discrete Choice Experiment Values Using Composite Time Trade-Off Data: The Case of EQ-5D-Y-3L.

Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are becoming increasingly used to elicit preferences for children's health states. However, DCE data need to be anchored to produce value sets, and composite time trade-off (cTTO) data are typically used in the context of EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation. The objective of this paper is to compare different anchoring methods, summarise the characteristics of the value sets they produce, and outline key considerations for analysts. Three anchoring methods were compared using data from published studies: (1) rescaling using the mean value for the worst health state; (2) linear mapping; and (3) hybrid modelling. The worst state rescaling value set had the largest range. The worst state rescaling and linear mapping value sets preserved the relative importance of the dimensions from the DCE, whereas the hybrid model value set did not. Overall, the predicted values from the hybrid model value set were more closely aligned with the cTTO values. These findings are relatively generalisable. Deciding upon which anchoring approach to use is challenging, as there are numerous considerations. Where cTTO data are collected for more than one health state, anchoring on the worst health state will arguably be suboptimal. However, the final choice of approach may require value judgements to be made. Researchers should seek input from relevant stakeholders when commencing valuation studies to help guide decisions and should clearly set out their rationale for their preferred anchoring approach in study outputs.

Benefits and harms adopted by health economic assessments evaluating antenatal and newborn screening programmes in OECD countries: A systematic review of 336 articles and reports.

BACKGROUND: Health economic assessments are used to determine whether the resources needed to generate net benefit from a screening programme, driven by multiple complex benefits and harms, are justifiable. We systematically identified the benefits and harms incorporated within economic assessments evaluating antenatal and newborn screening programmes. METHODS: For this systematic review and thematic analysis, we searched the published and grey literature from January 2000 to January 2021. Studies that included an economic evaluation of an antenatal or newborn screening programme in an OECD country were eligible. We identified benefits and harms using an integrative descriptive analysis, and illustrated a thematic framework. (Systematic review registration PROSPERO, CRD42020165236). FINDINGS: The searches identified 52,244 articles and reports and 336 (242 antenatal and 95 newborn) were included. Eighty-six subthemes grouped into seven themes were identified: 1) diagnosis of screened for condition, 2) life years and health status adjustments, 3) treatment, 4) long-term costs, 5) overdiagnosis, 6) pregnancy loss, and 7) spillover effects on family members. Diagnosis of screened for condition (115 studies, 47.5%), life-years and health status adjustments (90 studies, 37.2%) and treatment (88 studies, 36.4%) accounted for most of the benefits and harms evaluating antenatal screening. The same themes accounted for most of the benefits and harms included in studies assessing newborn screening. Overdiagnosis and spillover effects tended to be ignored. INTERPRETATION: Our proposed framework can be used to guide the development of future health economic assessments evaluating antenatal and newborn screening programmes, to prevent exclusion of important potential benefits and harms.

Assessing the Validity of the Long-Term Conditions Questionnaire (LTCQ) in Women During Pregnancy and the First Year Following Birth.

Background: The aim of this study was to validate a generic patient-reported outcome measure, the Long-Term Conditions Questionnaire (LTCQ), among pregnant and postpartum women living with a pre-existing long-term condition (LTC). Methods: Cognitive interviews were conducted with women who were currently pregnant or had given birth within the past year and living with a pre-existing LTC (n=11) and with healthcare professionals working in maternal care (n=11) to explore the acceptability of LTCQ items. An online survey was subsequently administered among women who were pregnant or had given birth within the past year and living with a pre-existing LTC (n=718). Tests of validity were performed including assessing correlations between the LTCQ and reference measures, the Well-being in Pregnancy (WiP) Questionnaire and the EuroQol EQ-5D-5L. Internal consistency was assessed using the Cronbach's alpha statistic. Results: All LTCQ items were considered relevant and appropriate for use with women who were pregnant or had given birth within the past year. The most commonly reported LTC among the online survey sample (n=718) was a mental health condition (n=350, 48.7%) followed by joint, bone and connective tissues (n= 212, 29.5%) and gastrointestinal (n=143, 19.9%) condition. Data indicated LTCQ scores behaved in a predictable pattern, demonstrating poorer scores for women reporting a greater number of LTCs; mean (SD) scores, one LTC= 61.86 (17.8), two LTCs= 55.29 (16.0), three LTCs= 49.84 (15.52) and four LTCs= 44.94 (12.2). Poorer scores were also reported for women living with at least one mental health condition compared to those reporting no mental health condition, mean score = 66.18 (SD 16.7) v 48.64 (SD 13.3), p<0.001 respectively. As anticipated, LTCQ scores demonstrated significant correlations in the expected direction with both the EQ-5D-5L and WiP scores. For all LTCQ items, the Cronbach's alpha statistic was 0.93. Conclusion: Data presented here indicate that the LTCQ, which assesses living well with one or more LTC, is suitable for use among pregnant and postpartum women, from both the woman's perspective and from the perspectives of maternity healthcare professionals. Use of the LTCQ would facilitate the identification of unmet needs within this high-risk cohort and support the exploration of how LTCs may affect women throughout the pregnancy and post-natal period. Understanding unmet needs within this cohort of women provides an opportunity to link up specialist care within maternity services and enhance personalised care.

Using stated-preferences methods to develop a summary metric to determine successful treatment of children with a surgical condition: a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Wide variation in the management of key paediatric surgical conditions in the UK has likely resulted in outcomes for some children being worse than they could be. Consequently, it is important to reduce unwarranted variation. However, major barriers to this are the inability to detect differences between observed and expected hospital outcomes based on the casemix of the children they have treated, and the inability to detect variation in significant outcomes between hospitals. A stated-preference study has been designed to estimate the value key stakeholders place on different elements of the outcomes for a child with a surgical condition. This study proposes to develop a summary metric to determine what represents successful treatment of children with surgical conditions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Preferences from parents, individuals treated for surgical conditions as infants/children, healthcare professionals and members of the public will be elicited using paired comparisons and kaizen tasks. A descriptive framework consisting of seven attributes representing types of operations, infections treated in hospital, quality of life and survival was identified. An experimental design has been completed using a D-efficient design with overlap in three attributes and excluding implausible combinations. All participants will be presented with an additional choice task including a palliative scenario that will be used as an anchor. The survey will be administered online. Primary analysis will estimate a mixed multinomial logit model. A traffic light system to determine what combination of attributes and levels represent successful treatment will be created. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval to conduct this study has been obtained from the Medical Sciences Inter-Divisional Research Ethics Committee (IDREC) at the University of Oxford (R59631/RE001-05). We will disseminate all of our results in peer-review publications and scientific presentations. Findings will be additionally disseminated through relevant charities and support groups and professional organisations.

Accounting for Unobservable Preference Heterogeneity and Evaluating Alternative Anchoring Approaches to Estimate Country-Specific EQ-5D-Y Value Sets: A Case Study Using Spanish Preference Data.

OBJECTIVES: The EuroQol Group published the EQ-5D-Y valuation protocol that recommends 2 valuation techniques to elicit preferences: composite time trade-off (C-TTO) and discrete choice experiments (DCEs). The protocol left the decision of what modeling approach to use open for researchers. Our aims were to explore modeling strategies allowing generation of EQ-5D-Y value sets and to produce an EQ-5D-Y Spanish value set. METHODS: We used EQ-5D-Y DCE and C-TTO data collected in Spain following the protocol and adopted a staged approach for our modeling exercise. First, we selected the best performing DCE latent class model and evaluated models from 2 to 10 classes. We selected the preferred model based on best goodness of fit in terms of the Bayesian information criterion. We considered 2 anchoring approaches to estimate utility values: (1) pits state anchoring and (2) hybrid models (using all available C-TTO responses). All analysis were weighted to be representative of the Spanish population. RESULTS: We collected 1005 DCE and 200 C-TTO interviews. We selected a DCE model including 4 classes. Hybrid models using all available C-TTO observations produced a narrower range of values than the pits state anchoring approach. CONCLUSIONS: In this article, we have presented an EQ-5D-Y value set that can be used for cost-utility analysis in Spain. The international EQ-5D-Y valuation protocol should be updated to include a different set of health states for the C-TTO experiment if researchers wish to use alternative anchoring approaches to the "pits state."