Trial reportPsycho-oncology2018
Cost-utility analysis of meaning-centered group psychotherapy for cancer survivors.
Trial report in Psycho-oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 5 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Narrative Therapy: A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Effectiveness for Improving Biopsychosocial Outcomes in People With Cancer.Psycho-oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Cognitive-behavioral and mindfulness-based therapies for mental health and quality of life of breast cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.International journal of clinical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of economic analyses of psychological interventions and therapies in health-related settings.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Economic Evaluation of Long-Term Survivorship Care for Cancer Patients in OECD Countries: A Systematic Review for Decision-Makers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Effects of psychosocial support interventions on survival in inpatient and outpatient healthcare settings: A meta-analysis of 106 randomized controlled trials.PLoS medicine · 2021Pooled it
- The effects of virtual logotherapy on health-promoting lifestyle among single-parent adolescent girls during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: a randomized clinical trial.BMC women's health · 2023Trial
- Long-term efficacy of meaning-centered group psychotherapy for cancer survivors: 2-Year follow-up results of a randomized controlled trial.Psycho-oncology · 2020Trial
- Meaning-Centered Psychotherapy for Psilocybin-Assisted Therapy Among Patients with Advanced Cancer and Depression: Rationale and Preliminary Evaluation of MCP-PSIL.Psychedelic medicine (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- The EORTC QLU-C10D is a valid cancer-specific preference-based measure for cost-utility and health technology assessment in the Netherlands.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024Article
- Cost comparison of in-person and telehealth modalities for a suicide safety planning group intervention: interim results from the "Project Life Force" randomized clinical trial.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMeaning-centered group psychotherapy for cancer survivors (MCGP-CS) improves meaning, psychological well-being, and mental adjustment to cancer and reduces psychological distress. This randomized controlled trial was conducted to investigate the cost-utility of MCGP-CS compared with supportive group psychotherapy (SGP) and care-as-usual (CAU).
methodsIn total, 170 patients were randomized to MCGP-CS, SGP, or CAU. Intervention costs, direct medical and nonmedical costs, productivity losses, and health-related quality of life were measured until 6 months follow-up, using the TIC-P, PRODISQ, data from the hospital information system, and the EQ-5D. The cost-utility was calculated by comparing mean cumulative costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).
resultsMean total costs ranged from €4492 (MCGP-CS) to €5304 (CAU). Mean QALYs ranged .507 (CAU) to .540 (MCGP-CS). MCGP-CS had a probability of 74% to be both less costly and more effective than CAU, and 49% compared with SGP. Sensitivity analyses showed these findings are robust. If society is willing to pay €0 for one gained QALY, MCGP-CS has a 78% probability of being cost-effective compared with CAU. This increases to 85% and 92% at willingness-to-pay thresholds of €10 000 and €30 000, which are commonly accepted thresholds.
conclusionsMCGP-CS is highly likely a cost-effective intervention, meaning that there is a positive balance between the costs and gains of MCGP-CS, in comparison with SGP and CAU.
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.