ArticleHealth services research2009
How bad is depression? Preference score estimates from depressed patients and the general population.
Article in Health services research, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing Depression Among At-Risk Youths: Postintervention and 2-Year Follow-Up.Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) · 2019Trial
- Cost-effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depressed Youth Declining Antidepressants.Pediatrics · 2018Trial
- Cost-effectiveness of family psychoeducation to prevent relapse in major depression: results from a randomized controlled trial.BMC psychiatry · 2012Trial
- Incremental cost-effectiveness of combined therapy vs medication only for youth with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor-resistant depression: treatment of SSRI-resistant depression in adolescents trial findings.Archives of general psychiatry · 2011Trial
- Do socio-demographic characteristics and/or health status explain the magnitude of differences between patient and general public utility values? A chronic low back pain patients case study.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2019Article
- The Worth of a Quality-Adjusted Life-Year in Patients with Diabetes: An Investigation Study using a Willingness-to-Pay Method.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2019Article
- The impact of depression on health-related quality of life and wellbeing: identifying important dimensions and assessing their inclusion in multi-attribute utility instruments.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018Article
- Experience-based utility and own health state valuation for a health state classification system: why and how to do it.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2018Article
- Depression increases subjective stigma of chronic pain.Journal of affective disorders · 2018Article
- Health and wellness among incoming resident physicians: A multi-domain survey.Journal of community medicine (Reno, Nev.) · 2018Article
- Evaluating the consequences of rheumatoid arthritis.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2017Article
- Does the EQ-5D capture the effects of physical and mental health status on life satisfaction among older people? A path analysis approach.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2017Article
- Valuation of depression co-occurring with a somatic condition: feasibility of the time trade-off task.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2015Article
- Do individuals with and without depression value depression differently? And if so, why?Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2015Article
- Comparison of general population, patient, and carer utility values for dementia health states.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2015Article
- Long-term health investment when people underestimate their adaptation to old age-related health problems.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2013Article
- Time trade-off: one methodology, different methods.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2013Article
- Losing sight of the wood for the trees: some issues in describing and valuing health, and another possible approach.PharmacoEconomics · 2012Article
- Physical victimization of rural methamphetamine and cocaine users.Violence and victims · 2012Article
- Empirical validation of patient versus population preferences in calculating QALYs.Health services research · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare depression health state preference scores across four groups: (1) general population, (2) previous history of depression but not currently depressed, (3) less severe current depression, and (4) more severe current depression. DATA SOURCES: Primary data were collected from 95 general population, 163 primary care, and 83 specialty mental health subjects. STUDY
designStratified sampling frames were used to recruit general population and patient subjects. Subjects completed cross-sectional surveys. Key variables included rating scale and standard gamble scores assigned to depression health state descriptions developed from the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and SF-12. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION
methodsEach subject completed an in-person interview. Forty-nine subjects completed test/retest reliability interviews. PRINCIPAL
findingsDepressed patient preference scores for three of six SF-12 depression health states were significantly lower than the general population using the rating scale and two of six were significantly lower using standard gamble. Depressed patient scores for five of six PHQ-9 depression health states were significantly lower than the general population using the rating scale and two of six were significantly lower using standard gamble.
conclusionsDepressed patients report lower preference scores for depression health states than the general population. In effect, they perceived depression to be worse than the general public perceived it to be. Additional research is needed to examine the implications for cost-effectiveness ratios using general population preference scores versus depressed patient preference scores.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.