ArticleBJPsych open2026
The cost-effectiveness of predictive algorithm guided primary antidepressant treatment: economic evaluation of the multinational PReDicT randomised controlled trial.
Article in BJPsych open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02790970 (Interventional, Randomised, Open Label, Multi-centre, Parallel-group, Controlled Study Investigating the Effects of Using the PReDicT Test to Guide the Antidepressant Treatment of Depressed Patients), which is not on this 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.
Interventional, Randomised, Open Label, Multi-centre, Parallel-group, Controlled Study Investigating the Effects of Using the PReDicT Test to Guide the Antidepressant Treatment of Depressed Patients
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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe PReDicT study showed that predictive algorithm-guided antidepressant treatment reduces anxiety and improves functioning in patients with depression.
aimsTo estimate the costs, outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the PReDicT test compared with treatment as usual (TAU) for primary depression care in five European countries.
methodWithin-trial economic analysis was conducted over 24 weeks from the health/social care and societal perspectives alongside the PReDicT trial (NCT02790970) in France, Germany, The Netherlands, Spain, and the UK, according to Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards guidelines. We calculated quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) based on the EQ-5D-5L, capability-weighted life-years based on the Oxford Capabilities Questionnaire - Mental Health (OxCAP-MH) (Germany and UK only), and costs for 2018 (€). Multiple imputation for missing data, multivariable regression for cost and outcome differences, and bootstrapping and sensitivity analyses for uncertainty were conducted.
resultsThere were significant outcome improvements (EQ-5D-5L PRedicT: +0.139; TAU: +0.140) and societal cost reductions (PRedicT: -€2589; TAU: -€2602) in both groups (
conclusionsWe observed potentially meaningful health and economic benefits of closely monitored antidepressant treatment, as implemented in both treatment and control arms of the PReDicT trial. The PReDicT test itself had some added benefits in improved capabilities and productivity, however, with great uncertainty and country-level variations in cost-effectiveness.
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.