Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37708109›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2023

Scale-up costs and societal benefits of psychological interventions for alcohol use and depressive disorders in India.

Siddhesh Zadey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Siddhesh ZadeyGEMINI Research Center, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1176-1529

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is growing evidence for cost-effective psychological interventions by lay health workers for managing mental health problems. In India, Counseling for Alcohol Problems (CAP) and Healthy Activity Program (HAP) have been shown to have sustained cost-effectiveness for improving harmful alcohol use among males and depression remission among both sexes, respectively. We conducted a retrospective analysis of annual costs and economic benefits of CAP and HAP national scale-up with 2019 as the baseline. The CAP and HAP per capita integration costs were obtained from original studies, prevalence and disability-adjusted life-years for alcohol use disorders (AUD) and depressive disorders for 20-64 years old males and females from Global Burden of Disease study, and treatment gaps from National Mental Health Survey. We calculated three outcomes: 1) Programmatic scale-up costs for covering total or unmet needs. 2) Societal benefits from averted disease burden using human capital and value of life-year approaches. 3) Combinations of net benefits as differences between societal benefits and scale-up costs. Values were transformed to 2019 international dollars. CAP scale-up costs ranged from Int$ 2.03 (95%UI: 1.67, 2.44) billion to Int$ 6.34 (5.21, 7.61) billion while HAP ones ranged from Int$ 6.85 (5.61, 8.12) billion to Int$ 23.21 (19.03, 27.52) billion. Societal benefits due to averted AUD burden ranged from Int$ 11.51 (8.75, 14.90) billion to Int$ 38.73 (29.43, 50.11) billion and those due to averted depression burden ranged from Int$ 30.89 (20.77, 43.32) billion to Int$ 105.27 (70.78, 147.61) billion. All scenarios showed net positive benefits for CAP (Int$ 6.05-36.38 billion) and HAP (Int$ 11.12-93.50 billion) scale-up. The novel national-level scale-up estimates have actionable implications for mental health financing in India.

Identifiers

PMID37708109
PMCPMC10501670

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.