ArticleBMC health services research2013
Innovation in health economic modelling of service improvements for longer-term depression: demonstration in a local health community.
Article in BMC health services research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Replicating Health Economic Models: Firm Foundations or a House of Cards?PharmacoEconomics · 2017Article
- Model-Based Economic Evaluation of Treatments for Depression: A Systematic Literature Review.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2017Review
- The cost-effectiveness of changes to the care pathway used to identify depression and provide treatment amongst people with diabetes in England: a model-based economic evaluation.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Squaring the circle: a priority-setting method for evidence-based service development, reconciling research with multiple stakeholder views.BMC health services research · 2015Article
- Resource modelling: the missing piece of the HTA jigsaw?PharmacoEconomics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of the analysis was to develop a health economic model to estimate the costs and health benefits of alternative National Health Service (NHS) service configurations for people with longer-term depression.
methodModelling methods were used to develop a conceptual and health economic model of the current configuration of services in Sheffield, England for people with longer-term depression. Data and assumptions were synthesised to estimate cost per Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs).
resultsThree service changes were developed and resulted in increased QALYs at increased cost. Versus current care, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for a self-referral service was £11,378 per QALY. The ICER was £2,227 per QALY for the dropout reduction service and £223 per QALY for an increase in non-therapy services. These results were robust when compared to current cost-effectiveness thresholds and accounting for uncertainty.
conclusionsCost-effective service improvements for longer-term depression have been identified. Also identified were limitations of the current evidence for the long term impact of services.
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.