Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38130121›Full record

ArticleBJPsych open2023

First-episode psychosis intervention programme versus standard care for the clinical management of early phases of psychosis: cost analysis.

Oliver Ibarrondo, María Recio-Barbero, Iker Ustarroz, Janire Cabezas-Garduño, Oihane Mentxaka, Teresa Acaiturri, Elisa Gómez, Rafael Segarra

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BJPsych open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. BJPsych open · 2025
    Review
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Oliver IbarrondoRS-Statistics, Arrasate-Mondragón, Gipuzkoa, Spain; and Research Unit, Debagoiena Integrated Healthcare Organisation, Basque Health Service (Osakidetza), Arrasate-Mondragón, Guipúzcoa, Spain.
María Recio-BarberoEarly Stages of Psychosis Group, Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Barakaldo, Biscay, Spain; and Department of Neurosciences, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Leioa, Biscay, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1783-5453
Iker UstarrozEconomic-Financial Directorate, Cruces University Hospital, Barakaldo, Biscay, Spain.
Janire Cabezas-GarduñoEarly Stages of Psychosis Group, Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Barakaldo, Biscay, Spain; and Department of Psychiatry, Cruces University Hospital, Barakaldo, Biscay, Spain.
Oihane MentxakaEarly Stages of Psychosis Group, Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Barakaldo, Biscay, Spain; Department of Neurosciences, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Leioa, Biscay, Spain; and Department of Psychiatry, Cruces University Hospital, Barakaldo, Biscay, Spain.
Teresa AcaiturriEconomic-Financial Directorate, Cruces University Hospital, Barakaldo, Biscay, Spain.
Elisa GómezEconomic-Financial Directorate, Cruces University Hospital, Barakaldo, Biscay, Spain.
Rafael SegarraEarly Stages of Psychosis Group, Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Barakaldo, Biscay, Spain; Department of Neurosciences, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Leioa, Biscay, Spain; Department of Psychiatry, Cruces University Hospital, Barakaldo, Biscay, Spain; and Centre for Biomedical Research in Mental Health, Carlos III Institute of Health (CIBERSAM ISCIII), Leioa, Biscay, Spain.
Hospital de Cruces · ESUniversity of the Basque Country · ESBioCruces Health research Institute · ESHospital Alto Deba · ES

Funding

Eusko Jaurlaritza IT1512-22
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly intervention programmes (EIPs) in psychosis have gained attention as specialised interventions to improve health-related and societal impacts for people with psychotic disorders. Previous studies have presented evidence in favour of EIPs over the first year of intervention, despite none considering the critical period before psychosis onset (5 years).

aimsTo compare the associated costs of the First Episode Psychosis Intervention Program (CRUPEP) and treatment as usual (TAU) in a real-world cohort in a non-specialised psychiatric community setting.

methodDirect and indirect mental health-related costs were calculated over 1 year and up to 7 years. Healthcare and societal costs were calculated from economic data related to the consumption of all healthcare resources, including emergency department attendances, hospital admissions, psychotropic medication prescriptions and societal costs.

resultsFrom a healthcare perspective, the intervention (CRUPEP) group initially showed a marginally higher cost per patient than the TAU group (€7621 TAU group

conclusionsThe EIP (CRUPEP) showed clinical benefits and minimised the direct and indirect health-related costs of the management of psychosis. Although the CRUPEP intervention initially reported increased costs over 1 year, TAU surpassed the global costs over the entire follow-up.

Indexed as

costseconomicsFirst-episode psychosispsychotic disordersschizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID38130121
PMCPMC10755560
OpenAlexW4390112644

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.