Table 1.
Study characteristics and results
| Source | Evaluation type | Country | Intervention | Source effectiveness data | Type of data | Time horizon | Results* |
| Programmes to prevent depression/sucide | |||||||
| Smit et al. (2006) [38] | CEA | Nether-lands | Minimal contact-therapy for primary prevention of depression | Pragmatic RCT | Primary data | 1 yr | 80% probability of cost-effectiveness if WTP per case avoided is below US$ 23,000 |
| Petrou et al. (2006) [39] | CEA | UK | Home visiting therapist f. primary prevention of post-natal depression | Pragmatic RCT | Primary data | 18 months | 70% probability of cost-effectiveness if WTP per depressive month avoided is below US$ 1,800 |
| Lynch et al. (2006) [46] | CEA | USA | CBT for high at risk teens for depression | RCT | Secondary data | 1 yr | US$ -14 to US$ 24 per DFD; US$ -12,200 to US$ 3,400 per QALY |
| Valenstein et al. (2001) [47] | CUA | USA | Various types of Screening for depression | Secondary literat./not specified; Meta-analysis of RCTs | Simulation/modelling | Life-time | Cost utility ratios unfavourable; 1-time screening compared to no screening lowest ICUR(on average US$ 47,000 per QALY) |
| Sari et al. (2007) [49] | CBA | USA | General education and peer support to prevent suicide in high-school | Secondary literature/not specified | Simulation/modelling | 1 yr | Net benefit: US$ 21 million and US$ 32 million respectively; ratio: US$ 2.36:1 and US$ 4.3:1 |
| Zaloshnja et al. (2003) [44] | CUA/CBA | USA | Lay people training for crisis-support | Prospective observational trial | Secondary data | 10 yrs | Benefit-cost ratio: 47:1; ICUR: US$ 460 per QALY |
| Appleby et al. (2000) [42] | CEA | UK | Education for health professionals to assess and manage suicidal patients | Prospective observational trial | Primary data | 1 yr | US$ 6,200 per LYG; US$ 183,000 per suicide prevented |
| Byford et al. (1999) [41] | CCA | UK | Social work intervention for adolescents with risk for self-harm | Pragmatic RCT | Primary data | 5 months | Intervention not more effective and not more costly |
| Rutz et al. (1992) [45] | CBA | Sweden | Educational programme for GPs to detect depression | Prospective observational trial | Secondary data | Life-time | Net benefit: US$ 37 million |
| Programmes that address overall risk factors for mental disorders | |||||||
| Wiggins et al. (2004) [40] | CCA | UK | Post-natal support for young mothers in deprived city areas | Pragmatic RCT | Primary data | 18 months | Interventions not more effective and not cost saving |
| McAuley et al. (2004) [43] | CEA, CCA | UK | Home start support for young families | Prospective observational trial | Primary data | 11 months | Intervention not more effective and more costly |
| Schweinhart (2005) [48] | CBA | USA | Early child development programme (ECD) | Pragmatic RCT | Simulation/modelling | 40 yrs | US $ 19.81 return per invested US$ |
| Lynch (2004) [36] | CBA | USA | ECD | Several pragmatic RCTs | Simulation/modelling | 45 yrs | After 17 yrs: budget benefits outweigh costs; benefit-cost ratios: US$ 4.01 to 9.27 per $ invested |
| Aos et al. (2004) [37] | CBA | USA | Several type of childhood and adolescent support programmes | Systematic review of RCTs | Simulation/modelling | Life-time | From net-benefit of US$ 33,100 to net costs of US$ 52,000 depending on programme |
CBA: Cost benefit analysis; CCA: cost-consequence analysis; CEA: Cost effectiveness analysis; CUA: Cost utility analysis; DFD: depression free day; ICUR: Incremental cost utility ratio; LYG: Life year gained; QALY: quality adjusted life years; RCT: Randomised controlled trial; WTP: willingness to pay; * original results have been converted into US$ according to GDP-PPP where required and inflated to 2006 price levels