ArticleEvidence-based mental health2019
Value of monitoring negative emotional bias in primary care in England for personalised antidepressant treatment: a modelling study.
Article in Evidence-based mental health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Use of Expert Elicitation among Computational Modeling Studies in Health Research: A Systematic Review.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Pooled it
- The cost-effectiveness of predictive algorithm guided primary antidepressant treatment: economic evaluation of the multinational PReDicT randomised controlled trial.BJPsych open · 2026Article
- Utilization of Time Series Tools in Life-sciences and Neuroscience.Neuroscience insights · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDepressed patients often focus on negative life events. Effective antidepressant therapy reverses this negative emotional bias (NEB) within 1 week. Clinical therapeutic effect usually requires 4-6 weeks. The value of implementing NEB monitoring for the personalisation of antidepressant therapy is unknown.
objectiveTo estimate the likely outcome and cost consequences of adopting the P1vital Oxford Emotional Test Battery (ETB) for this purpose in routine primary care in England.
methodsA hybrid decision analytic model (decision tree plus Markov model) was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of ETB monitoring versus no ETB over 52 weeks using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Differences in depression severity, episode type and analytical perspectives were considered. Input data were derived from relevant guidelines, literature, national databases, expert opinion and the developers for the year 2013. Multiple sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty.
findingsThe mean number of ETB tests is 2.162 per newly diagnosed patient and 2.166 per patient with recurrent depression. The incremental cost-effectiveness of ETB versus 'no ETB' is £4355/QALY from the healthcare perspective. From the broader societal perspective, ETB is more effective and cost saving.
conclusionsMonitoring negative emotional bias in primary care in England for personalised antidepressant treatment using ETB seems as an effective and cost-effective option under all considered scenarios (including worst case). Its main economic value seems to lie in reduced productivity loss as opposed to healthcare savings. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The test supports accelerated application of evidence-based depression care. Further optimisation and implementation in the ongoing European PReDicT trial is ongoing.
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.