ArticleAnnals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine2021
Minimal-Contact Versus Standard Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Cost-Effectiveness Results of a Multisite Trial.
Article in Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Smartphone Application With Health Coaching Facilitates Multi-Symptom Improvement in IBS Patients: A Pilot Feasibility Trial.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2025Article
- Economic Evaluations of Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Treating Disorders of Gut-Brain Interaction: A Scoping Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
- Pain in irritable bowel syndrome: Does anything really help?Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2022Review
- Cognitive behavioral treatment for irritable bowel syndrome: a recent literature review.BioPsychoSocial medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIrritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common, often disabling gastrointestinal (GI) disorder for which there is no satisfactory medical treatment but is responsive to cognitive behavior therapy (CBT). PURPOSE: To evaluate the costs and cost-effectiveness of a minimal contact version of CBT (MC-CBT) condition for N = 145 for IBS relative to a standard, clinic-based CBT (S-CBT; N = 146) and a nonspecific comparator emphasizing education/support (EDU; N = 145).
methodWe estimated the per-patient cost of each treatment condition using an activity-based costing approach that allowed us to identify and estimate costs for specific components of each intervention as well as the overall total costs. Using simple means analysis and multiple regression models, we estimated the incremental effectiveness of MC-CBT relative to S-CBT and EDU. We then evaluated the cost-effectiveness of MC-CBT relative to these alternatives for selected outcomes at immediate posttreatment and 6 months posttreatment, using both an intent-to-treatment and per-protocol methodology. Key outcomes included scores on the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement Scale and the percentage of patients who positively responded to treatment.
resultsThe average per-patient cost of delivering MC-CBT was $348, which was significantly less than the cost of S-CBT ($644) and EDU ($457) (p < .01). Furthermore, MC-CBT produced better average patient outcomes at immediate and 6 months posttreatment relative to S-CBT and EDU (p < .01). The current findings indicated that MC-CBT is a cost-effective option relative to S-CBT and EDU.
conclusionAs predicted, MC-CBT was delivered at a lower cost per patient than S-CBT and performed better over time on the primary outcome of global IBS symptom improvement.
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.