Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32924086›Full record

Trial reportEuropean child & adolescent psychiatry2021

Adding the Coping Power Programme to parent management training: the cost-effectiveness of stacking interventions for children with disruptive behaviour disorders.

Camilla Nystrand, Maria Helander, Pia Enebrink, Inna Feldman, Filipa Sampaio

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European child & adolescent psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Old enough to offend but not to buy a hamster: the argument for raising the minimum age of criminal responsibility.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2023
    Article
  4. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Camilla NystrandDepartment of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. camilla.nystrand@pubcare.uu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9866-1100
Maria HelanderDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9447-3914
Pia EnebrinkDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1082-683X
Inna FeldmanDepartment of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3329-6066
Filipa SampaioDepartment of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5540-9853
Uppsala University · SEKarolinska Institutet · SE

Funding

Stiftelsen Söderström Königska Sjukhemmet SLS-312941
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Parent management training (PMT) programmes and child cognitive behavioural therapy are recommended approaches for treatment of oppositional defiant disorder in children, and combining these may be effective. However, little is known regarding the economic efficiency of this additive effect. A within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out in Sweden including 120 children aged 8-12 who screened positive for disruptive behaviour disorders, within a psychiatric care setting, and their parents. They were randomly assigned to either the Swedish group-based PMT Comet, or to an enhanced version, where an additional child component was provided, the Coping Power Programme (CPP). Child behaviour problems as well as healthcare and educational resource use were measured at baseline, post-test and at two-year follow-up. A net benefit regression framework was used to estimate differences in costs and health outcomes between the two intervention arms during the two-year period. Comet with CPP cost on average 820 EURO more per family than Comet only. At the 2-year follow-up, there were 37% recovered cases of ODD in Comet with CPP, in comparison to 26% in the Comet only arm. At a willingness-to-pay of approximately 62,300 EURO per recovered case of ODD, Comet with CPP yielded positive net benefits, in comparison to Comet only. Offering children the CPP simultaneously as their parents receive PMT, in comparison to only providing PMT, yields clinically relevant gains. Despite the relatively small cost for CPP, investment in combining PMT and CPP should be guided by resource prioritisation. Trial registration number: ISRCTN10834473, date of registration: 23/12/2015.

Indexed as

Problem BehaviorAdaptation, PsychologicalAttention Deficit and Disruptive Behavior DisordersChildCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansParentsChild psychologyCognitive behavioural therapyCost-effectivenessParent management training

Identifiers

PMID32924086
PMCPMC8505382
OpenAlexW3086238665

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.