ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2026
Should the Spanish National Health System Invest in Psychotherapy for Depression? A Microsimulation Cost-Utility Study to Estimate the Economically Justifiable Price of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Versus Anti-depressant Medication.
Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) represents an effective psychotherapeutic intervention for patients with depression compared with anti-depressant medications (ADM).
objectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the economically justifiable price (EJP), consisting of an average cost of CBT per patient-year for which the intervention is cost effective versus ADM for the treatment of adults with depression in Spain.
methodsA patient-level microsimulation model was developed to conduct a cost-utility analysis over the patients' lifetime horizon. Patient demographics, epidemiology of depression, health resources consumption and health utilities feeding the model were sourced from the Spanish national health survey. Additional longitudinal inputs were derived from previously published economic analyses in depression. In the base case, the EJP was estimated for several willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds, including €0/QALY (dominancy) and €22,000/QALY. Two scenarios were considered presenting CBT as a substitute of ADM and both CBT and ADM combined (CBT/ADM). The robustness of the model and its results were tested using both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
resultsFor the scenario of CBT versus ADM, the EJP was estimated at €5236 for a WTP threshold of €22,000/QALY. At an EJP of €549, CBT was a dominant intervention compared with ADM. In the scenario considering CBT/ADM versus ADM, the EJP was €5449, CBT/ADM being dominant at an EJP of €255. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the base-case results were robust.
conclusionCBT and CBT/ADM achieved incremental health benefits compared with ADM. Under the estimated EJPs, CBT and CBT/ADM could represent a cost effective or dominant intervention for adult patients with depression in Spain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41436909What 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.