Skip to main content

Table 7 Comparison of utility weights from the current study with other mental health populations

From: The validity of the Child Health Utility instrument (CHU9D) as a routine outcome measure for use in child and adolescent mental health services

Reference

Population

Instrument

Utility

Current study

200 5–17 year olds with varied mental health presentations

CHU9D parent completed – UK adult tariff

.803 (.117)

200 5–17 year olds with varied mental health presentations

CHU9D parent completed – Australian adolescent tariff

.739 (.145)

CHU9D Studies

   

Stevens and Ratcliffe 2012 [9,10]

Community sample of 961 11 to 17 year olds

CHU9D self-report, web survey – UK tariff

.85

Sub-sample of 67 with long-standing disability, illness or medical condition

CHU9D self-report, web survey – UK tariff

.80

Sub-sample of 281 with score on KIDSCREEN below the median

CHU9D self-report, web survey – UK tariff

.789

Ratcliffe et al. 2012 [24]

Community sample of 710 11 to 17 year olds

CHU9D self-report, web survey –UK tariff

.931

Other studies of mental health populations

   

Petrou & Kupek 2009 [41]

46 children (mean age 10.9) on a disability registry with behaviour disorders

HUI3 – caregiver completed

.468

105 children (mean age 11) on a disability registry with autism spectrum disorder

HUI3 – caregiver completed

.433

50 children (mean age 10.9) on a disability registry with hyperactivity disorders

HUI3 – caregiver completed

.432

Petrou et al. 2010 [40]

39 children (aged 11) from a longitudinal study of pre-term infants

HUI3 – caregiver completed

.656

Goodyer et al. 2008 [42]

200 11–17 year olds with depression prior to SSRI therapy

EQ-5D

.49

Bodden et al. 2008 [43]

59 children with anxiety disorders prior to receiving individual CBT

EQ-5D

.87

57 children with anxiety disorders prior to receiving family CBT

EQ-5D

.83