Abstract
Composite time trade-off (cTTO) utilities have been found to be higher when adults value health states for children than for themselves. It is not clear if these differences reflect adults assigning truly higher utilities to the same health state in different perspectives, or if they are caused by other factors, which are not accounted for in the valuation procedure. We test if the difference between children's and adults' cTTO valuations changes if a longer duration than the standard 10 years is used. Personal interviews with a representative sample of 151 adults in the UK were conducted. We employed the cTTO method to estimate utilities of four different health states, where adults considered states both from their own and a 10-year-old child's perspective, for durations of 10 and 20 years. We corrected the cTTO valuations for perspective-specific time preferences in a separate task, again for both perspectives. We replicate the finding that cTTO utilities are higher for the child perspective than for the adult perspective, although the difference is only significant when controlling for other variables in a mixed effects regression. Time preferences are close to 0 on average, and smaller for children than adults. After correcting TTO utilities for time preferences, the effect of perspective is no longer significant. No differences were found for cTTO tasks completed with a 10- or 20-year duration. Our results suggest that the child-adult gap is partially related to differences in time preferences and, hence, that correcting cTTO utilities for these preferences could be useful.