Trial reportInternational journal of public health2026
Individual placement and support (IPS) integrated with specialized substance use disorder treatment: a socioeconomic analysis based on a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in International journal of public health, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To conduct a socioeconomic analysis of Individual Placement and Support (IPS) integrated with specialized substance use disorder treatment. Additionally, we explored group differences in the use of social and welfare services and assessed the validity of a previous simulation model. Methods: We used Early Health Technology Assessment (eHTA) to estimate socioeconomic gain using data extracted from a completed randomized controlled trial comparing IPS and enhanced treatment as usual (enhanced TAU) for patients in specialized substance use disorder treatment. Results: IPS was socioeconomically beneficial compared to enhanced TAU during the first year after end of the intervention (€992,224 for IPS, and €778,121 for enhanced TAU), equal to a group difference of €214,103 (modelled for 100 patients). During the trial period, IPS participants showed a total cost saving of €157,593 due to less use of social and welfare services, compared to participants receiving enhanced TAU. These estimates are comparable to our previous eHTA simulation. Conclusion: Our estimates indicate a net socioeconomic gain of IPS starting during the intervention year, which exceeds that of enhanced TAU in the first year following the intervention. Additional cost savings were found in favor of IPS. Our early simulated eHTA proved valid in one scenario.
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.