IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v19y2021i1d10.1007_s40258-020-00607-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Systematic Review and Critique of Methods for Economic Evaluation of Digital Mental Health Interventions

Author

Listed:
  • Dina Jankovic

    (The University of York, Alcuin College)

  • Laura Bojke

    (The University of York, Alcuin College)

  • David Marshall

    (University of York)

  • Pedro Saramago Goncalves

    (The University of York, Alcuin College)

  • Rachel Churchill

    (University of York)

  • Hollie Melton

    (University of York)

  • Sally Brabyn

    (University of York)

  • Lina Gega

    (University of York)

Abstract

Objectives Investment in digital interventions for mental health conditions is growing rapidly, offering the potential to elevate systems that are currently overstretched. Despite a growing literature on economic evaluation of digital mental health interventions (DMHIs), including several systematic reviews, there is no conclusive evidence regarding their cost-effectiveness. This paper reviews the methodology used to determine their cost-effectiveness and assesses whether this meets the requirements for decision-making. In doing so we consider the challenges specific to the economic evaluation of DMHIs, and identify where consensus and possible further research is warranted. Methods A systematic review was conducted to identify all economic evaluations of DMHIs published between 1997 and December 2018. The searches included databases of published and unpublished research, reference lists and citations of all included studies, forward citations on all identified protocols and conference abstracts, and contacting authors researchers in the field. The identified studies were critiqued against a published set of requirements for decision-making in healthcare, identifying methodological challenges and areas where consensus is required. Results The review identified 67 papers evaluating DMHIs. The majority of the evaluations were conducted alongside trials, failing to capture all relevant available evidence and comparators, and long-term impact of mental health disorders. The identified interventions are complex and heterogeneous. As a result, there are a number of challenges specific to their evaluation, including estimation of all costs and outcomes, conditional on analysis viewpoint, and identification of relevant comparators. A taxonomy for DMHIs may be required to inform what interventions can reasonably be pooled and compared. Conclusions This study represents the first attempt to understand the appropriateness of the methodologies used to evaluate the value for money of DMHIs, helping work towards consensus and methods’ harmonisation on these complex interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Dina Jankovic & Laura Bojke & David Marshall & Pedro Saramago Goncalves & Rachel Churchill & Hollie Melton & Sally Brabyn & Lina Gega, 2021. "Systematic Review and Critique of Methods for Economic Evaluation of Digital Mental Health Interventions," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 17-27, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:19:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s40258-020-00607-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-020-00607-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-020-00607-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-020-00607-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carla Guerriero & John Cairns & Ian Roberts & Anthony Rodgers & Robyn Whittaker & Caroline Free, 2013. "The cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation support delivered by mobile phone text messaging: Txt2stop," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(5), pages 789-797, October.
    2. Mark J. Sculpher & Karl Claxton & Mike Drummond & Chris McCabe, 2006. "Whither trial‐based economic evaluation for health care decision making?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(7), pages 677-687, July.
    3. Shefali Kumar & Megan Jones Bell & Jessie L Juusola, 2018. "Mobile and traditional cognitive behavioral therapy programs for generalized anxiety disorder: A cost-effectiveness analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Chris Sampson’s journal round-up for 1st February 2021
      by Chris Sampson in The Academic Health Economists' Blog on 2021-02-01 12:00:03

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Manuel Gomes & Elizabeth Murray & James Raftery, 2022. "Economic Evaluation of Digital Health Interventions: Methodological Issues and Recommendations for Practice," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 367-378, April.
    2. Dina Jankovic & Pedro Saramago Goncalves & Lina Gega & David Marshall & Kath Wright & Meena Hafidh & Rachel Churchill & Laura Bojke, 2022. "Cost Effectiveness of Digital Interventions for Generalised Anxiety Disorder: A Model-Based Analysis," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 377-388, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Renee Lévesque & Daniele Marcelli & Héloïse Cardinal & Marie-Line Caron & Muriel Grooteman & Michiel Bots & Peter Blankestijn & Menso Nubé & Aileen Grassmann & Bernard Canaud & Afschin Gandjour, 2015. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of High-Efficiency Hemodiafiltration Versus Low-Flux Hemodialysis Based on the Canadian Arm of the CONTRAST Study," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 13(6), pages 647-659, December.
    2. Saha, Sanjib & Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Toresson, Håkan & Minthon, Lennart & Jarl, Johan, 2018. "Economic Evaluation of Nonpharmacological Interventions for Dementia Patients and their Caregivers - A Systematic Literature Review," Working Papers 2018:10, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    3. Nina van der Vliet & Anita W.M. Suijkerbuijk & Adriana T. de Blaeij & G. Ardine de Wit & Paul F. van Gils & Brigit A.M. Staatsen & Rob Maas & Johan J. Polder, 2020. "Ranking Preventive Interventions from Different Policy Domains: What Are the Most Cost-Effective Ways to Improve Public Health?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-24, March.
    4. Sean Docking & Lan Gao & Zanfina Ademi & Christian Bonello & Rachelle Buchbinder, 2023. "Use of Decision-Analytic Modelling to Assess the Cost-Effectiveness of Diagnostic Imaging of the Spine, Shoulder, and Knee: A Scoping Review," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 467-475, May.
    5. Marta O. Soares & Simon Walker & Stephen J. Palmer & Mark J. Sculpher, 2018. "Establishing the Value of Diagnostic and Prognostic Tests in Health Technology Assessment," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 38(4), pages 495-508, May.
    6. Mohsen Ghaffari Darab & Lidia Engel & Dennis Henzler & Michael Lauerer & Eckhard Nagel & Vicki Brown & Cathrine Mihalopoulos, 2024. "Model-Based Economic Evaluations of Interventions for Dementia: An Updated Systematic Review and Quality Assessment," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 503-525, July.
    7. James A. Hall & Kika Konstantinou & Martyn Lewis & Raymond Oppong & Reuben Ogollah & Sue Jowett, 2019. "Systematic Review of Decision Analytic Modelling in Economic Evaluations of Low Back Pain and Sciatica," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 467-491, August.
    8. Gouveia, Catarina & Kalakou, Sofia & Cardoso-Grilo, Teresa, 2023. "How to forecast mental healthcare needs? Distinguishing between perceived and unperceived needs and their impact on capacity requirements," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PA).
    9. Nystrand, Camilla & Gebreslassie, Mihretab & Ssegonja, Richard & Feldman, Inna & Sampaio, Filipa, 2021. "A systematic review of economic evaluations of public health interventions targeting alcohol, tobacco, illicit drug use and problematic gambling: Using a case study to assess transferability," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(1), pages 54-74.
    10. Gemma E. Shields & Becky Pennington & Ash Bullement & Stuart Wright & Jamie Elvidge, 2022. "Out of Date or Best Before? A Commentary on the Relevance of Economic Evaluations Over Time," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 249-256, March.
    11. Richard M. Nixon & David Wonderling & Richard D. Grieve, 2010. "Non‐parametric methods for cost‐effectiveness analysis: the central limit theorem and the bootstrap compared," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(3), pages 316-333, March.
    12. Schulenburg J.-Matthias Graf von der & Vauth Christoph, 2007. "Nach welchen ökonomischen Methoden sollten Gesundheitsleistungen in Deutschland evaluiert werden? / According to Which Economic Methods Should Health Care Services Become Evaluated in Germany?," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 227(5-6), pages 787-806, October.
    13. Edward Burn & Alexander D. Liddle & Thomas W. Hamilton & Sunil Pai & Hemant G. Pandit & David W. Murray & Rafael Pinedo-Villanueva, 2017. "Choosing Between Unicompartmental and Total Knee Replacement: What Can Economic Evaluations Tell Us? A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 1(4), pages 241-253, December.
    14. Laura Bojke & Andrea Manca & Miqdad Asaria & Ronan Mahon & Shijie Ren & Stephen Palmer, 2017. "How to Appropriately Extrapolate Costs and Utilities in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(8), pages 767-776, August.
    15. Ana Sofia Oliveira Gonçalves & Dimitra Panteli & Lars Neeb & Tobias Kurth & Annette Aigner, 2022. "HIT-6 and EQ-5D-5L in patients with migraine: assessment of common latent constructs and development of a mapping algorithm," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(1), pages 47-57, February.
    16. Yeonsoo Jang & Sang Hoon Ahn & Kyunghwa Lee & Oh Young Kwon & Jeong Hyun Kim, 2021. "Development and Pilot Testing of a Smartphone-Based Self-Care Program for Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-13, October.
    17. Stavros Petrou & Joseph Kwon & Jason Madan, 2018. "A Practical Guide to Conducting a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Health State Utility Values," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(9), pages 1043-1061, September.
    18. Andrew Briggs, 2012. "Statistical Methods for Cost-effectiveness Analysis Alongside Clinical Trials," Chapters, in: Andrew M. Jones (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Health Economics, Second Edition, chapter 50, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Youngji Jo & Amnesty E LeFevre & Katherine Healy & Neelu Singh & Kelsey Alland & Sucheta Mehra & Hasmot Ali & Saijuddin Shaikh & Rezawanul Haque & Parul Christian & Alain B Labrique, 2019. "Costs and cost-effectiveness analyses of mCARE strategies for promoting care seeking of maternal and newborn health services in rural Bangladesh," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-13, October.
    20. J.- Graf v. d. Schulenburg & Christoph Vauth & Thomas Mittendorf & Wolfgang Greiner, 2007. "Methods for determining cost-benefit ratios for pharmaceuticals in Germany," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 8(1), pages 5-31, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:19:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s40258-020-00607-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.