ArticlePsychological medicine2014
Modelling the cost-effectiveness of preventing major depression in general practice patients.
Article in Psychological medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Modelling in economic evaluation of mental health prevention: current status and quality of studies.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Smoking Cessation Interventions in the United Kingdom Accounting for Major Neuropsychiatric Adverse Events.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2021Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness evidence of mental health prevention and promotion interventions: A systematic review of economic evaluations.PLoS medicine · 2021Pooled it
- A personalized intervention to prevent depression in primary care: cost-effectiveness study nested into a clustered randomized trial.BMC medicine · 2018Trial
- Cost-Effectiveness of a Universal School-Based Mental Health Prevention Program: An Economic Modeling Study in a Limited Income Context.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Article
- Net benefit separation and the determination curve: A probabilistic framework for cost-effectiveness estimation.Statistical methods in medical research · 2021Article
- Protective Effects of Ursolic Acid Against Cytotoxicity Induced by Corticosterone: Role of Protein Kinases.Neurochemical research · 2019Article
- Cost-effectiveness of a mindfulness-based mental health promotion program: economic evaluation of a nonrandomized controlled trial with propensity score matching.BMC public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe prevention of depression is a key public health policy priority. PredictD is the first risk algorithm for the prediction of the onset of major depression. Our aim in this study was to model the cost-effectiveness of PredictD in depression prevention in general practice (GP).
methodA decision analytical model was developed to determine the cost-effectiveness of two approaches, each of which was compared to treatment as usual (TAU) over 12 months: (1) the PredictD risk algorithm plus a low-intensity depression prevention programme; and (2) a universal prevention programme in which there was no initial identification of those at risk. The model simulates the incidence of depression and disease progression over 12 months and calculates the net monetary benefit (NMB) from the National Health Service (NHS) perspective.
resultsProviding patients with PredictD and a depression prevention programme prevented 15 (17%) cases of depression in a cohort of 1000 patients over 12 months and had the highest probability of being the optimal choice at a willingness to pay (WTP) of £20,000 for a quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Universal prevention was strongly dominated by PredictD plus a depression prevention programme in that universal prevention resulted in less QALYs than PredictD plus prevention for a greater cost.
conclusionsUsing PredictD to identify primary-care patients at high risk of depression and providing them with a low-intensity prevention programme is potentially cost-effective at a WTP of £20,000 per QALY.
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.