Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37940930›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2023

Protocol for an economic evaluation of scalable strategies to improve mental health among perinatal women: non-specialist care delivered via telemedicine vs. specialist care delivered in-person.

Daisy R Singla, Claire de Oliveira, Sean M Murphy, Vikram Patel, Jaime Charlebois, Wendy N Davis, Cindy-Lee Dennis, J Jo Kim, Paul Kurdyak, Andrea Lawson and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2023. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. 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

17 authors at 9 institutions in 3 countries.

Daisy R Singla *Institute for Mental Health Policy Research, Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Canada. daisy.singla@utoronto.ca.
Claire de Oliveira *Institute for Mental Health Policy Research, Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Canada.
Sean M MurphyDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
Vikram PatelDepartment of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
Jaime CharleboisCanadian Perinatal Mental Health Collaborative, Barrie, Canada.
Wendy N DavisPostpartum Support International, Portland, USA.
Cindy-Lee DennisDepartment of Psychiatry, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
J Jo KimDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, USA.
Paul KurdyakInstitute for Mental Health Policy Research, Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Canada.
Andrea LawsonInstitute for Mental Health Policy Research, Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Canada.
Samantha Meltzer-BrodyDepartment of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA.
Benoit H MulsantInstitute for Mental Health Policy Research, Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Canada.
Nour Schoueri-MychasiwLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health, Toronto, Canada.
Richard K SilverDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, USA.
Dana TschritterLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health, Toronto, Canada.
Simone N VigodDepartment of Psychiatry, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Sarah ByfordKing's Health Economics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health · CALunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute · CANorthShore University HealthSystem · USUniversity of Toronto · CABarrie Urology Group · CABoston University · USCornell University · USKing's College London · GBUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPerinatal depression affects an estimated 1 in 5 women in North America during the perinatal period, with annualized lifetime costs estimated at $20.6 billion CAD in Canada and over $45.9 billion USD in the US. Access to psychological treatments remains limited for most perinatal women suffering from depression and anxiety. Some barriers to effective care can be addressed through task-sharing to non-specialist providers and through telemedicine platforms. The cost-effectiveness of these strategies compared to traditional specialist and in-person models remains unknown. This protocol describes an economic evaluation of non-specialist providers and telemedicine, in comparison to specialist providers and in-person sessions within the ongoing Scaling Up Maternal Mental healthcare by Increasing access to Treatment (SUMMIT) trial.

methodsThe economic evaluation will be undertaken alongside the SUMMIT trial. SUMMIT is a pragmatic, randomized, non-inferiority trial across five North American study sites (N = 1,226) of the comparable effectiveness of two types of providers (specialist vs. non-specialist) and delivery modes (telemedicine vs. in-person) of a behavioural activation treatment for perinatal depressive and anxiety symptoms. The primary economic evaluation will be a cost-utility analysis. The outcome will be the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, which will be expressed as the additional cost required to achieve an additional quality-adjusted life-year, as assessed by the EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level instrument. A secondary cost-effectiveness analysis will use participants' depressive symptom scores. A micro-costing analysis will be conducted to estimate the resources/costs required to implement and sustain the interventions; healthcare resource utilization will be captured via self-report. Data will be pooled and analysed using uniform price and utility weights to determine cost-utility across all trial sites. Secondary country-specific cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses will also be completed. Sensitivity analyses will be conducted, and cost-effectiveness acceptability-curves will be generated, in all instances. DISCUSSION: Results of this study are expected to inform key decisions related to dissemination and scale up of evidence-based psychological interventions in Canada, the US, and possibly worldwide. There is potential impact on real-world practice by informing decision makers of the long-term savings to the larger healthcare setting in services to support perinatal women with common mental health conditions.

Indexed as

Depressive DisorderTelemedicineAnxietyCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansMental HealthEconomic evaluationPerinatal mental healthProtocolRandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID37940930
PMCPMC10634150
OpenAlexW4388489591

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.