Trial reportPloS one2025
Cost-effectiveness of Transcendental Meditation (TM) for treating Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).
Trial report in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveA recent trial found that Transcendental Meditation (TM) was an effective non-trauma focused treatment for veterans with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The objective of this analysis was to examine the cost-effectiveness of TM for PTSD based on the trial results.
methodsBetween 2013-2017, 203 veterans with PTSD were randomized to either TM, Prolonged Exposure (PE), or to a PTSD health education (HE) control. Each group received 12 treatment sessions over 12 weeks. Results indicated that TM was non-inferior to PE for improving PTSD outcomes and both TM and PE were superior to HE, as hypothesized. The proportion of participants with a clinically significant improvement on the CAPS (≥10 point reduction) were TM = 61%, PE = 42%, and HE = 32%. A Markov model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of TM, using the trial effectiveness data. Intervention costs, health care costs, and health utility values associated with response and non-response were derived from scientific literature. Costs were viewed from an organizational perspective and a 5-year time horizon (20 3-month cycles). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.
resultsTM was the dominant treatment strategy over both PE and HE in the cost-effectiveness analysis. TM cost an estimated $1504/12 sessions while PE and HE cost $2,822 and $492, respectively. The higher health care costs associated with non-response to therapy offset intervention cost differences. Findings were robust to variability.
conclusionIn summary, using data from a recent RCT, TM was found to both improve health outcomes and reduce total costs in this analysis. Based on these results, further effectiveness trials and wider adoption of TM should be considered.
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.