ArticleBJPsych open2016
Cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients with depression: evidence from the Healthlines randomised controlled trial.
Article in BJPsych open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness of Internet Interventions Compared With Treatment as Usual for People With Mental Disorders: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Prevalence of Depression in the Community from 30 Countries between 1994 and 2014.Scientific reports · 2018Pooled it
- Cost Utility Analysis of Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Major Depressive Disorder: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Health and social care use, costs, and satisfaction among key workers accessing Resilience Hub support during the COVID-19 pandemic.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Considering the societal perspective in economic evaluations: a systematic review in the case of depression.Health economics review · 2020Review
- Effect of nurse-led home-based biofeedback intervention on the blood pressure levels among patients with hypertension: Pretest-posttest study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2020Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Sertraline in Primary Care According to Initial Severity and Duration of Depressive Symptoms: Findings from the PANDA RCT.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2020Article
- Article
- Cost analysis of implementing a telegeriatrics ecosystem with nursing homes: panel data analysis.Health systems (Basingstoke, England) · 2019Article
- Internet-Delivered Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Major Depression and Anxiety Disorders: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2019Article
- The impact of a remote monitoring system of healthcare resource consumption in patients on automated peritoneal dialysis (APD): A simulation study .Clinical nephrology · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDepression is a prevalent long-term condition that is associated with substantial resource use. Telehealth may offer a cost-effective means of supporting the management of people with depression.
aimsTo investigate the cost-effectiveness of a telehealth intervention ('Healthlines') for patients with depression.
methodA prospective patient-level economic evaluation conducted alongside a randomised controlled trial. Patients were recruited through primary care, and the intervention was delivered via a telehealth service. Participants with a confirmed diagnosis of depression and PHQ-9 score ≥10 were recruited from 43 English general practices. A series of up to 10 scripted, theory-led, telephone encounters with health information advisers supported participants to effect a behaviour change, use online resources, optimise medication and improve adherence. The intervention was delivered alongside usual care and was designed to support rather than duplicate primary care. Cost-effectiveness from a combined health and social care perspective was measured by net monetary benefit at the end of 12 months of follow-up, calculated from incremental cost and incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Cost-consequence analysis included cost of lost productivity, participant out-of-pocket expenditure and the clinical outcome.
resultsA total of 609 participants were randomised - 307 to receive the Healthlines intervention plus usual care and 302 to receive usual care alone. Forty-five per cent of participants had missing quality of life data, 41% had missing cost data and 51% of participants had missing data on either cost or utility, or both. Multiple imputation was used for the base-case analysis. The intervention was associated with incremental mean per-patient National Health Service/personal social services cost of £168 (95% CI £43 to £294) and an incremental QALY gain of 0.001 (95% CI -0.023 to 0.026). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £132 630. Net monetary benefit at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 was -£143 (95% CI -£164 to -£122) and the probability of the intervention being cost-effective at this threshold value was 0.30. Productivity costs were higher in the intervention arm, but out-of-pocket expenses were lower.
conclusionsThe Healthlines service was acceptable to patients as a means of condition management, and response to treatment after 4 months was higher for participants randomised to the intervention. However, the positive average intervention effect size was modest, and incremental costs were high relative to a small incremental QALY gain at 12 months. The intervention is not likely to be cost-effective in its current form. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: None. COPYRIGHT AND USAGE: © The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2016. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence.
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.