Trial reportPloS one2026
Cost-effectiveness of a mentalisation-based treatment for antisocial personality disorder in males convicted of an offence on community probation in England and Wales: Multicentre, assessor-blind randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study addresses a critical gap in the evidence base for cost-effective psychological interventions for antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) in forensic settings by presenting a full trial-based economic evaluation of mentalisation-based treatment plus probation as usual (MBT-ASPD + PAU), compared to PAU alone, for males with ASPD convicted of an offence in England and Wales. The economic evaluation adopted a societal perspective, incorporating costs to health care, the criminal justice system, and the wider societal impact of offending. Outcomes were assessed 24 months post-randomisation. The primary cost-utility analysis compared costs with quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) derived from the EQ-5D-5L, while a secondary cost-effectiveness analysis compared costs with aggression outcomes measured by the Overt Aggression Scale - Modified (OAS-M). Although missing data limited definitive conclusions regarding service use, available data suggest that participants in the PAU group spent more time in custody than those in the MBT-ASPD + PAU group. Utility scores and quality of life showed minimal variation over follow-up, with no significant differences between groups. Overall costs were lower in the MBT-ASPD + PAU group, though not statistically significant. Over the 24-month period, MBT-ASPD + PAU was associated with both reduced costs and lower aggression (as reflected in OAS-M scores), indicating that each unit reduction in aggression yielded a cost saving of approximately £93. For QALYs, MBT-ASPD + PAU appeared cost-effective compared to PAU across all values a decision-maker may be willing to pay for improvements in outcome. These findings provide preliminary evidence for the potential economic value of MBT-ASPD + PAU in a forensic ASPD population, particularly in relation to aggression reduction and the associated cost savings. Trial registrationThis trial is registered with ISRCTN (ISRCTN 32309003).
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.