Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26651478›Full record

Trial reportBMC psychiatry2015

Cost-effectiveness of blended vs. face-to-face cognitive behavioural therapy for severe anxiety disorders: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

Geke Romijn, Heleen Riper, Robin Kok, Tara Donker, Maartje Goorden, Leona Hakkaart van Roijen, Lisa Kooistra, Anton van Balkom, Jeroen Koning

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC psychiatry, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Geke RomijnFaculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Department of Clinical Psychology, VU University Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 1, BT 1081, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. g.a.romijn@vu.nl.
Heleen RiperFaculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Department of Clinical Psychology, VU University Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 1, BT 1081, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. h.riper@vu.nl.
Robin KokFaculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Department of Clinical Psychology, VU University Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 1, BT 1081, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. r.n.kok@vu.nl.
Tara DonkerFaculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Department of Clinical Psychology, VU University Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 1, BT 1081, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. t.donker@vu.nl.
Maartje GoordenInstitute for Medical Technology Assessment (iMTA), Erasmus University, PO box 1738, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. goorden@bmg.eur.nl.
Leona Hakkaart van RoijenInstitute for Medical Technology Assessment (iMTA), Erasmus University, PO box 1738, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. hakaart@bmg.eur.nl.
Lisa KooistraFaculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Department of Clinical Psychology, VU University Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 1, BT 1081, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. l.c.kooistra@vu.nl.
Anton van BalkomEMGO Institute for Health Care and Research, VU University Medical Centre, Van der Boechorststraat 7, BT 1081, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. t.vanbalkom@ggzingeest.nl.
Jeroen KoningFaculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Department of Clinical Psychology, VU University Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat 1, BT 1081, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. j.koning@propersona.nl.
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLEMGO Institute for Health and Care Research · NLErasmus MC · NLErasmus University Rotterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnxiety disorders are among the most prevalent psychiatric conditions, and are associated with poor quality of life and substantial economic burden. Cognitive behavioural therapy is an effective treatment to reduce anxiety symptoms, but is also costly and labour intensive. Cost-effectiveness could possibly be improved by delivering cognitive behavioural therapy in a blended format, where face-to-face sessions are partially replaced by online sessions. The aim of this trial is to determine the cost-effectiveness of blended cognitive behavioural therapy for adults with anxiety disorders, i.e. panic disorder, social phobia or generalized anxiety disorder, in specialized mental health care settings compared to face-to-face cognitive behavioural therapy. In this paper, we present the study protocol. It is hypothesized that blended cognitive behavioural therapy for anxiety disorders is clinically as effective as face-to-face cognitive behavioural therapy, but that intervention costs may be reduced. We thus hypothesize that blended cognitive behavioural therapy is more cost-effective than face-to-face cognitive behavioural therapy. METHODS/

designIn a randomised controlled equivalence trial 156 patients will be included (n = 78 in blended cognitive behavioural therapy, n = 78 in face-to-face cognitive behavioural therapy) based on a power of 0.80, calculated by using a formula to estimate the power of a cost-effectiveness analysis: [Formula: see text]. Measurements will take place at baseline, midway treatment (7 weeks), immediately after treatment (15 weeks) and 12-month follow-up. At baseline a diagnostic interview will be administered. Primary clinical outcomes are changes in anxiety symptom severity as measured with the Beck Anxiety Inventory. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio will be calculated to obtain the costs per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) measured by the EQ-5D (5-level version). Health-economic outcomes will be explored from a societal and health care perspective. DISCUSSION: This trial will be one of the first to provide information on the cost-effectiveness of blended cognitive behavioural therapy for anxiety disorders in routine specialized mental health care settings, both from a societal and a health care perspective.

trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register NTR4912. Registered 13 November 2014.

Indexed as

AdultAnxiety DisordersCognitive Behavioral TherapyCost-Benefit AnalysisDelivery of Health CareFemaleHumansInterview, PsychologicalNetherlandsOffice VisitsPanic DisorderQuality-Adjusted Life YearsQuality of LifeTreatment OutcomeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26651478
PMCPMC4676824
OpenAlexW2203268943

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.