Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29329486›Full record

SynthesisDepression and anxiety2018

Cost effectiveness of guided Internet-based interventions for depression in comparison with control conditions: An individual-participant data meta-analysis.

Spyros Kolovos, Johanna M van Dongen, Heleen Riper, Claudia Buntrock, Pim Cuijpers, David D Ebert, Anna S Geraedts, Robin M Kenter, Stephanie Nobis, Andrea Smith and 4 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Depression and anxiety, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 7 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Digital interventions in mental health: evidence syntheses and economic modelling.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2022
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

14 authors.

Spyros KolovosDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3201-1743
Johanna M van DongenDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Heleen RiperDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Claudia BuntrockDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Pim CuijpersDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5497-2743
David D EbertDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Nägelsbachstr, Erlangen, Germany.
Anna S GeraedtsArboNed, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Robin M KenterDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Stephanie NobisDivision of Online Health Training, Innovation Incubator, Leuphana University Lueneburg, Lueneburg, Germany.
Andrea SmithDepartment of Community Health and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Lisanne WarmerdamStichting Benchmark GGZ (the Dutch Benchmark Foundation in Mental Health Care), Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Jill A HaydenDepartment of Community Health and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Maurits W van TulderDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Judith E BosmansDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is limited evidence on the cost effectiveness of Internet-based treatments for depression. The aim was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of guided Internet-based interventions for depression compared to controls.

methodsIndividual-participant data from five randomized controlled trials (RCT), including 1,426 participants, were combined. Cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted at 8 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months follow-up.

resultsThe guided Internet-based interventions were more costly than the controls, but not statistically significant (12 months mean difference = €406, 95% CI: - 611 to 1,444). The mean differences in clinical effects were not statistically significant (12 months mean difference = 1.75, 95% CI: - .09 to 3.60 in Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale [CES-D] score, .06, 95% CI: - .02 to .13 in response rate, and .00, 95% CI: - .03 to .03 in quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves indicated that high investments are needed to reach an acceptable probability that the intervention is cost effective compared to control for CES-D and response to treatment (e.g., at 12-month follow-up the probability of being cost effective was .95 at a ceiling ratio of 2,000 €/point of improvement in CES-D score). For QALYs, the intervention's probability of being cost effective compared to control was low at the commonly accepted willingness-to-pay threshold (e.g., at 12-month follow-up the probability was .29 and. 31 at a ceiling ratio of 24,000 and 35,000 €/QALY, respectively).

conclusionsBased on the present findings, guided Internet-based interventions for depression are not considered cost effective compared to controls. However, only a minority of RCTs investigating the clinical effectiveness of guided Internet-based interventions also assessed cost effectiveness and were included in this individual-participant data meta-analysis.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisInternetTelemedicineDepressionDepressive DisorderHumanscost effectivenesscost utilitydepressionindividual-participant data meta-analysisInternet-based intervention

Identifiers

PMID29329486
PMCPMC5888145

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.