Psychometric Evaluation of Self- and Proxy-Reported EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L in Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

IF 6.2 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Richard Huan Xu, Chenxi Yang, Zhuxin Mao, Xiao Liang, Fanni Rencz
{"title":"Psychometric Evaluation of Self- and Proxy-Reported EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L in Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.","authors":"Richard Huan Xu, Chenxi Yang, Zhuxin Mao, Xiao Liang, Fanni Rencz","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2026.07.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of 2 versions of EuroQol 5-Dimension Youth version (EQ-5D-Y) (3 level [Y-3L] and 5 level [Y-5L]) in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and to compare their performance across self- and proxy-reported responses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Overall, 188 child-caregiver dyads (mean age 9 years with a clinical ADHD diagnosis) completed a cross-sectional survey, followed by a 2-week assessment to examine test-retest reliability. Outcome measures included the Y-3L and Y-5L, Child Health utility 9D, Child Behavior Checklist, and the Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Rating Scale for ADHD severity. Ceiling, informativity, convergent and known-group validity, patient-proxy agreement, and test-retest reliability were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Self-reported Y-3L (48%) and Y-5L (28%) had higher ceilings than proxy versions (32% and 25%), and the Y-5L showed higher absolute informativity for both self- and proxy-reports. Self-reports correlated more strongly with the child-completed Child Health utility 9D, whereas proxy reports were more aligned with Child Behavior Checklist. Self-report version showed good known-groups validity: the Y-3L discriminated 11 of 14 groups, and the Y-5L discriminated 13 of 14. The proxy versions showed slightly weaker discrimination. Item-level test-retest reliability and patient-proxy agreement were good (Gwet's agreement coefficient [AC] 0.71-0.98 and 0.70-0.97), but scale-level reliability and agreement were lower.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In Chinese children with ADHD, the Y-3L appears more suitable for self-report, whereas the Y-5L may be better for proxy report, depending on the population and study aims. Further research is needed to identify the optimal version across age groups and clinical conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2026.07.003","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of 2 versions of EuroQol 5-Dimension Youth version (EQ-5D-Y) (3 level [Y-3L] and 5 level [Y-5L]) in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and to compare their performance across self- and proxy-reported responses.

Methods: Overall, 188 child-caregiver dyads (mean age 9 years with a clinical ADHD diagnosis) completed a cross-sectional survey, followed by a 2-week assessment to examine test-retest reliability. Outcome measures included the Y-3L and Y-5L, Child Health utility 9D, Child Behavior Checklist, and the Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Rating Scale for ADHD severity. Ceiling, informativity, convergent and known-group validity, patient-proxy agreement, and test-retest reliability were assessed.

Results: Self-reported Y-3L (48%) and Y-5L (28%) had higher ceilings than proxy versions (32% and 25%), and the Y-5L showed higher absolute informativity for both self- and proxy-reports. Self-reports correlated more strongly with the child-completed Child Health utility 9D, whereas proxy reports were more aligned with Child Behavior Checklist. Self-report version showed good known-groups validity: the Y-3L discriminated 11 of 14 groups, and the Y-5L discriminated 13 of 14. The proxy versions showed slightly weaker discrimination. Item-level test-retest reliability and patient-proxy agreement were good (Gwet's agreement coefficient [AC] 0.71-0.98 and 0.70-0.97), but scale-level reliability and agreement were lower.

Conclusion: In Chinese children with ADHD, the Y-3L appears more suitable for self-report, whereas the Y-5L may be better for proxy report, depending on the population and study aims. Further research is needed to identify the optimal version across age groups and clinical conditions.

注意缺陷/多动障碍儿童自我和代理报告EQ-5D-Y-3L和EQ-5D-Y-5L的心理测量学评价
目的:本研究旨在评估两种版本的EQ-5D-Y (Y-3L和Y-5L)在注意缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)儿童中的心理测量特性,并比较他们在自我报告和代理报告反应中的表现。方法:总共188名儿童照顾者(平均年龄9岁,临床诊断为ADHD)完成了一项横断面调查,随后进行了为期两周的评估,以检验测试-重测信度。结果测量包括Y-3L和Y-5L、儿童健康实用工具9D (CHU-9D)、儿童行为检查表(CBCL)和Swanson、Nolan和Pelham ADHD严重程度评定量表(SNAP-IV)。评估了天花板、信息性、收敛性和已知组效度、患者-代理一致性和测试-重测信度。结果:自我报告的Y-3L(48%)和Y-5L(28%)的上限高于代理版本(32%和25%),Y-5L在自我报告和代理报告中都显示出更高的绝对信息性。自我报告与儿童完成的CHU-9D的相关性更强,而代理报告与CBCL的相关性更强。自我报告版本显示出良好的已知组效度:Y-3L区分了14个组中的11个,Y-5L区分了14个组中的13个。代理版本的歧视程度稍弱。项目水平的测试-重测信度和患者-代理一致性较好(Gwet的AC为0.71-0.98和0.70-0.97),但量表水平的信度和一致性较低。结论:在中国ADHD儿童中,Y-3L更适合自我报告,而Y-5L可能更适合代理报告,但这取决于人群和研究目的。需要进一步的研究来确定跨年龄组和临床条件的最佳版本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Value in Health
Value in Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
3064
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书