Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24447460›Full record

Trial reportTrials2014

Cost and outcome of behavioural activation versus cognitive behaviour therapy for depression (COBRA): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Shelley Rhodes, David A Richards, David Ekers, Dean McMillan, Sarah Byford, Paul A Farrand, Simon Gilbody, Steven D Hollon, Willem Kuyken, Christopher Martell and 6 more

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Behavioural activation therapy for depression in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Innovative Psychological Treatments for Depression.Focus (American Psychiatric Publishing) · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Shelley Rhodes
David A RichardsUniversity of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter EX1 2 LU, UK. d.a.richards@exeter.ac.uk.
David Ekers
Dean McMillan
Sarah Byford
Paul A Farrand
Simon Gilbody
Steven D Hollon
Willem Kuyken
Christopher Martell
Heather A O'Mahen
Emer O'Neill
Nigel Reed
Rod S Taylor
Ed R Watkins
Kim A Wright

Funding

Department of Health 10/50/14Department of Health HTA/10/50/14
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) is an effective treatment for depression. However, CBT is a complex therapy that requires highly trained and qualified practitioners, and its scalability is therefore limited by the costs of training and employing sufficient therapists to meet demand. Behavioural activation (BA) is a psychological treatment for depression that may be an effective alternative to CBT and, because it is simpler, might also be delivered by less highly trained and specialised mental health workers. METHODS/

designCOBRA is a two-arm, non-inferiority, patient-level randomised controlled trial, including clinical, economic, and process evaluations comparing CBT delivered by highly trained professional therapists to BA delivered by junior professional or para-professional mental health workers to establish whether the clinical effectiveness of BA is non-inferior to CBT and if BA is cost effective compared to CBT. Four hundred and forty patients with major depressive disorder will be recruited through screening in primary care. We will analyse for non-inferiority in per-protocol and intention-to-treat populations. Our primary outcome will be severity of depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9) at 12 months follow-up. Secondary outcomes will be clinically significant change and severity of depression at 18 months, and anxiety (General Anxiety Disorder-7 questionnaire) and health-related quality of life (Short-Form Health Survey-36) at 12 and 18 months. Our economic evaluation will take the United Kingdom National Health Service/Personal Social Services perspective to include costs of the interventions, health and social care services used, plus productivity losses. Cost-effectiveness will explored in terms of quality-adjusted life years using the EuroQol-5D measure of health-related quality of life. DISCUSSION: The clinical and economic outcomes of this trial will provide the evidence to help policy makers, clinicians and guideline developers decide on the merits of including BA as a first-line treatment of depression.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN27473954.

Indexed as

Health Care CostsResearch DesignBehavior TherapyClinical ProtocolsCognitive Behavioral TherapyCost-Benefit AnalysisEnglandHumansIntention to Treat AnalysisMajor Depressive DisorderPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesQuality-Adjusted Life YearsQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesTime FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID24447460
PMCPMC3903024

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.