ETTR is always worth it - when it makes practical sense...
The fact that DR has improved, and with it the issue of sensor-related noise generation, however, neither the essential principles of sensor light-gathering nor the physics of light itself has changed!
There are many scenarios where all one can realistically aim for is avoiding overall underexposure...
However, if one is shooting at a slow pace, particularly if one has the camera on a tripod, the scene is relatively still relative to shutter speed, and one can shoot at base ISO, then it is well worth it to get that histogram well over to the right!
Shot noise, related purely to the physics of light, is always going to be present, no matter how good a sensor gets, and so the more light hitting the sensor the better.
Any part of an image with the same hue (like a blue sky in a landscape shot) as well as any area with low exposure are where shot noise will become more apparent although it is present everywhere.
Frankly, for ultimate image quality, being able to sharpen without concern for exacerbating the effects of any noise that is present, and, conversely, not needing to bludgeon an image with noise reduction relying rather on very subtle noise reduction (some is always needed) can, potentially take image-making to another level...
(Obviously, pointing one's camera at a worthwhile scene is always primary and post-processing is always consequent to that!)
So, yes when I am shooting wildlife, my only concern is keeping my camera/lens still and having a fast enough shutter speed to freeze the action (aperture is wide open, and to hell with the ISO..) ETTR is the last thing on my mind!
However, if I am shooting on a tripod with sufficient light to allow me to capture what I want at the aperture I want and a sensible shutter speed for the subject then absolutely, ETTR will allow me to squeeze the last bit of goodness out of what are already excellent sensors...
Tony Jay