Health Preferences in Transition: Differences from Pandemic to Post-Pandemic in Valuation of COVID-19 and RSV Illness in Children and Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to measure changes in preferences regarding health-related quality of life associated with COVID-19 and RSV illness in children and adults from 2021 (during the COVID-19 pandemic) to 2023 (post-pandemic). Methods: A stated-preference survey elicited time trade-off (TTO) values from US adults in spring 2021 (n = 1014) and summer 2023 (n = 1186). Respondents were asked to indicate how much time they would hypothetically be willing to trade from the end of their life to avoid the effects of varying severities of COVID-19 and RSV illness for: (1) children; (2) parents of an ill child (family spillover); and (3) adults. Attitudes relating to COVID-19 vaccination and data on experience with COVID-19 or RSV illness were also collected. The primary outcome measure was the loss in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Changes in preferences over the time period from 2021 to 2023 were evaluated using regression analysis. Results: QALY losses increased with disease severity and were highest for Long COVID. Across all COVID-19 and RSV health states, QALY losses associated with child health states were higher than family spillover or adult health states. In the regression analysis, QALY losses reported in the 2023 survey were significantly lower than 2021 QALY losses for COVID-19, but not RSV. Conclusions: Preferences may change over time in a pandemic context and therefore, economic analyses of pandemic interventions should consider the timeframe of health preference data collection to determine whether they are suitable to include in an economic evaluation. Even with the impacts on health-related quality of life attenuated over time, childhood illnesses still had a measurable impact on caregivers’ quality of life.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".