Trial reportBMC health services research2021
Is bouldering-psychotherapy a cost-effective way to treat depression when compared to group cognitive behavioral therapy - results from a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of indoor rock climbing and bouldering as treatment for depression - a systematic review.BMC psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- WISE-Therapy (What's Important: Schedule and Engage) and bouldering psychotherapy for depression: A randomized clinical trial.BMC medicine · 2026Trial
- Multi-component interventions combining psychotherapy and physical activity for children and young peoples' mental health: A scoping review.PLOS mental health · 2025Article
- Article
- The Origin, Application and Mechanism of Therapeutic Climbing: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- Incorporating productivity loss in health economic evaluations: a review of guidelines and practices worldwide for research agenda in China.BMJ global health · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBouldering-Psychotherapy (BPT) has proven to effectively reduce depressive symptoms, but evidence on its cost-effectiveness is lacking. Corresponding information is paramount to support health policy decision making on a potential implementation of BPT in routine care.
methodsUsing data from the German KuS trial BPT was compared with group Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT). Severity of depression symptoms at end of the intervention was operationalized via Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Adopting a societal perspective, direct medical costs and productivity loss were calculated based on standardized unit costs. To determine incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and cost-effectiveness-acceptance curves (CEAC), adjusted mean differences (AMD) in costs (gamma-distributed model) and both effect parameters (Gaussian-distributed model) were obtained from 1000 simultaneous bootstrap replications.
resultsBPT was related to improved effects (AMDs: MADRS -2.58; PHQ-9: - 1.35) at higher costs (AMD: +€ 754). No AMD was significant. ICERs amounted to €288 per MADRS-point and €550 per PHQ-9-point. For both effect parameters about 20% of bootstrap replications indicated dominance of BPT, and about 75% larger effects at higher costs. At hypothetical willingness to pay (WTP) thresholds of €241 (MADRS) and €615 (PHQ-9) per unit of change BPT had a 50% probability of being cost-effective.
conclusionBPT is a promising alternate treatment strategy which - in absence of established WTP thresholds for improving symptoms of depression - cannot unambiguously be claimed cost-effective. Further studies defining subgroups that particularly benefit from BPT appear paramount to delineate recommendations for an efficient prospective roll-out to routine care.
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.