↓ Skip to main content

Economic evaluation of an experience sampling method intervention in depression compared with treatment as usual using data from a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Economic evaluation of an experience sampling method intervention in depression compared with treatment as usual using data from a randomized controlled trial
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12888-017-1577-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claudia J. P. Simons, Marjan Drukker, Silvia Evers, Ghislaine A. P. G. van Mastrigt, Petra Höhn, Ingrid Kramer, Frenk Peeters, Philippe Delespaul, Claudia Menne-Lothmann, Jessica A. Hartmann, Jim van Os, Marieke Wichers

Abstract

Experience sampling, a method for real-time self-monitoring of affective experiences, holds opportunities for person-tailored treatment. By focussing on dynamic patterns of positive affect, experience sampling method interventions (ESM-I) accommodate strategies to enhance personalized treatment of depression-at potentially low-costs. This study aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of an experience sampling method intervention in patients with depression, from a societal perspective. Participants were recruited between January 2010 and February 2012 from out-patient mental health care facilities in or near the Dutch cities of Eindhoven and Maastricht, and through local advertisements. Out-patients diagnosed with major depression (n = 101) receiving pharmacotherapy were randomized into: (i) ESM-I consisting of six weeks of ESM combined with weekly feedback regarding the individual's positive affective experiences, (ii) six weeks of ESM without feedback, or (iii) treatment as usual only. Alongside this randomised controlled trial, an economic evaluation was conducted consisting of a cost-effectiveness and a cost-utility analysis, using Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) as outcome, with willingness-to-pay threshold for a QALY set at €50,000 (based on Dutch guidelines for moderate severe to severe illnesses). The economic evaluation showed that ESM-I is an optimal strategy only when willingness to pay is around €3000 per unit HDRS and around €40,500 per QALY. ESM-I was the least favourable treatment when willingness to pay was lower than €30,000 per QALY. However, at the €50,000 willingness-to-pay threshold, ESM-I was, with a 46% probability, the most favourable treatment (base-case analysis). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these results. We may tentatively conclude that ESM-I is a cost-effective add-on intervention to pharmacotherapy in outpatients with major depression. Netherlands Trial register, NTR1974 .

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 20%
Student > Master 13 12%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 26 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 29 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 30 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 December 2017.
All research outputs
#12,843,308
of 14,537,474 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#3,040
of 3,401 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#336,598
of 400,287 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#367
of 415 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,537,474 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,401 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 400,287 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 415 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.