IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0203276.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A descriptive system for the Infant health-related Quality of life Instrument (IQI): Measuring health with a mobile app

Author

Listed:
  • Ruslan Jabrayilov
  • Antoinette D I van Asselt
  • Karin M Vermeulen
  • Sheri Volger
  • Patrick Detzel
  • Livia Dainelli
  • Paul F M Krabbe
  • for the Pediatrics expert group

Abstract

Background: The assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is important for health outcomes research, disease modeling studies and comparisons of different healthcare interventions. Yet, only a few tools are available to assess HRQoL in 0-1-year-old infants. Furthermore, there is a need for an instrument able to assess HRQoL with a single, standardized, overall score in the first year of life. Here we described the development of the Infant health-related Quality of life Instrument (IQI), a generic, preference-based instrument that can be administered through a mobile application for assessing HRQoL in 0-1-year-old infants. Methods: A multi-step development process began by extracting candidate health concepts from relevant measures identified by two literature searches. Next, three panels, with experts from Asia, Europe, New Zealand and United States of America, and two surveys, with primary caregivers in New Zealand, Singapore, and the United Kingdom, evaluated the relevance of the candidate health concepts, organized them into attributes based on their similarities, explored alternative attributes and generated response scales. Additional interviews assessed the cross-cultural interpretability, parents’ understanding of health attributes, and the usability of the mobile application. Results: The final list of 7 health attributes included in the IQI consisted of sleeping, feeding, breathing, stooling/poo, mood, skin, and interaction. The users’ experiences with the mobile application were generally positive. Conclusions: The IQI is the first generic, preference-based, instrument designed to assess overall HRQoL in 0-1-year old infants. It is short and easy-to-administer through a mobile application. Moreover, close attention was paid to the opinions of the infants’ primary caregivers during the instrument and mobile application development process.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruslan Jabrayilov & Antoinette D I van Asselt & Karin M Vermeulen & Sheri Volger & Patrick Detzel & Livia Dainelli & Paul F M Krabbe & for the Pediatrics expert group, 2018. "A descriptive system for the Infant health-related Quality of life Instrument (IQI): Measuring health with a mobile app," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-14, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0203276
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0203276
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0203276
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0203276&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0203276?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erik Nord & Anja Undrum Enge & Veronica Gundersen, 2010. "QALYs: is the value of treatment proportional to the size of the health gain?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(5), pages 596-607, May.
    2. Gang Chen & Julie Ratcliffe, 2015. "A Review of the Development and Application of Generic Multi-Attribute Utility Instruments for Paediatric Populations," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(10), pages 1013-1028, October.
    3. Krabbe, Paul, 2016. "The Measurement of Health and Health Status," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 1, number 9780128015049.
    4. Katherine Stevens, 2012. "Valuation of the Child Health Utility 9D Index," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(8), pages 729-747, August.
    5. Paul F M Krabbe, 2013. "A Generalized Measurement Model to Quantify Health: The Multi-Attribute Preference Response Model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-12, November.
    6. Arthur Attema & Yvette Edelaar-Peeters & Matthijs Versteegh & Elly Stolk, 2013. "Time trade-off: one methodology, different methods," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(1), pages 53-64, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paul F M Krabbe & Ruslan Jabrayilov & Patrick Detzel & Livia Dainelli & Karin M Vermeulen & Antoinette D I van Asselt, 2020. "A two-step procedure to generate utilities for the Infant health-related Quality of life Instrument (IQI)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-14, April.
    2. Joseph Kwon & Louise Freijser & Elisabeth Huynh & Martin Howell & Gang Chen & Kamran Khan & Shahd Daher & Nia Roberts & Conrad Harrison & Sarah Smith & Nancy Devlin & Kirsten Howard & Emily Lancsar & , 2022. "Systematic Review of Conceptual, Age, Measurement and Valuation Considerations for Generic Multidimensional Childhood Patient-Reported Outcome Measures," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 379-431, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Paul F M Krabbe & Ruslan Jabrayilov & Patrick Detzel & Livia Dainelli & Karin M Vermeulen & Antoinette D I van Asselt, 2020. "A two-step procedure to generate utilities for the Infant health-related Quality of life Instrument (IQI)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-14, April.
    2. Ratcliffe, Julie & Huynh, Elisabeth & Chen, Gang & Stevens, Katherine & Swait, Joffre & Brazier, John & Sawyer, Michael & Roberts, Rachel & Flynn, Terry, 2016. "Valuing the Child Health Utility 9D: Using profile case best worst scaling methods to develop a new adolescent specific scoring algorithm," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 48-59.
    3. Ruvini M. Hettiarachchi & Peter Arrow & Sameera Senanayake & Hannah Carter & David Brain & Richard Norman & Utsana Tonmukayawul & Lisa Jamieson & Sanjeewa Kularatna, 2023. "Developing an Australian utility value set for the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale-4D (ECOHIS-4D) using a discrete choice experiment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(8), pages 1285-1296, November.
    4. Julio Gallego-Méndez & Jorge Perez-Gomez & José Ignacio Calzada-Rodríguez & Ángel Manuel Denche-Zamorano & María Mendoza-Muñoz & Jorge Carlos-Vivas & Miguel Ángel Garcia-Gordillo & Jose C. Adsuar, 2020. "Relationship between Health-Related Quality of Life and Physical Activity in Children with Hyperactivity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-16, April.
    5. S. A. Lipman & V. T. Reckers-Droog & M. Karimi & M. Jakubczyk & A. E. Attema, 2021. "Self vs. other, child vs. adult. An experimental comparison of valuation perspectives for valuation of EQ-5D-Y-3L health states," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(9), pages 1507-1518, December.
    6. Kim Dalziel & Max Catchpool & Borja García-Lorenzo & Inigo Gorostiza & Richard Norman & Oliver Rivero-Arias, 2020. "Feasibility, Validity and Differences in Adolescent and Adult EQ-5D-Y Health State Valuation in Australia and Spain: An Application of Best–Worst Scaling," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(5), pages 499-513, May.
    7. Runtang Meng & Jingjing Li & Yunquan Zhang & Yong Yu & Yi Luo & Xiaohan Liu & Yanxia Zhao & Yuantao Hao & Ying Hu & Chuanhua Yu, 2018. "Evaluation of Patient and Medical Staff Satisfaction regarding Healthcare Services in Wuhan Public Hospitals," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, April.
    8. Anna Nicolet & Antoinette D I van Asselt & Karin M Vermeulen & Paul F M Krabbe, 2020. "Value judgment of new medical treatments: Societal and patient perspectives to inform priority setting in The Netherlands," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, July.
    9. Paul F M Krabbe, 2013. "A Generalized Measurement Model to Quantify Health: The Multi-Attribute Preference Response Model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-12, November.
    10. Clara Mukuria & Donna Rowen & Sue Harnan & Andrew Rawdin & Ruth Wong & Roberta Ara & John Brazier, 2019. "An Updated Systematic Review of Studies Mapping (or Cross-Walking) Measures of Health-Related Quality of Life to Generic Preference-Based Measures to Generate Utility Values," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 295-313, June.
    11. Rachael Maree Hunter & Mark Isaac & Alessandra Frigiola & David Blundell & Kate Brown & Kate Bull, 2013. "Lifetime Costs and Outcomes of Repair of Tetralogy of Fallot Compared to Natural Progression of the Disease: Great Ormond Street Hospital Cohort," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-7, March.
    12. Valentina Prevolnik Rupel & Marko Ogorevc, 2021. "EQ-5D-Y Value Set for Slovenia," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(4), pages 463-471, April.
    13. Ramesh Lamsal & Jennifer D. Zwicker, 2017. "Economic Evaluation of Interventions for Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders: Opportunities and Challenges," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 763-772, December.
    14. Husbands, Samantha & Mitchell, Paul Mark & Kinghorn, Philip & Byford, Sarah & Bailey, Cara & Anand, Paul & Peters, Tim J. & Floredin, Isabella & Coast, Joanna, 2024. "Is well-becoming important for children and young people? Evidence from in-depth interviews with children and young people and their parents," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 122060, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Anthony J. Culyer & Yvonne Bombard, 2012. "An Equity Framework for Health Technology Assessments," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(3), pages 428-441, May.
    16. Anthony J Culyer & Yvonne Bombard, 2011. "An Equity Checklist: a Framework for Health Technology Assessments," Working Papers 062cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    17. Wenjing Zhou & Anle Shen & Zhihao Yang & Pei Wang & Bin Wu & Michael Herdman & Nan Luo, 2021. "Patient-caregiver agreement and test–retest reliability of the EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L in paediatric patients with haematological malignancies," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(7), pages 1103-1113, September.
    18. Hammitt, James K. & Haninger, Kevin, 2017. "Valuing nonfatal health risk as a function of illness severity and duration: Benefit transfer using QALYs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 17-38.
    19. Mina Bahrampour & Joshua Byrnes & Richard Norman & Paul A. Scuffham & Martin Downes, 2020. "Discrete choice experiments to generate utility values for multi-attribute utility instruments: a systematic review of methods," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(7), pages 983-992, September.
    20. Carlos King Ho Wong & Prudence Wing Hang Cheung & Nan Luo & Jason Pui Yin Cheung, 2019. "A head-to-head comparison of five-level (EQ-5D-5L-Y) and three-level EQ-5D-Y questionnaires in paediatric patients," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(5), pages 647-656, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0203276. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.