. 2018 Jan 12;35(3):209–219. doi: 10.1002/da.22714

Table 3.

Differences in mean adjusted costs (€, 2014) and effects (95% confidence intervals), incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios, and distribution of incremental cost‐effect pairs on the cost‐effectiveness planes

Analysis	ΔC (95% CI)	ΔE (95% CI)	ICER	Distribution on CE Plane^b (%)
Outcome	€	Points	€/Point	NE	SE	SW	NW
Main analysis
8 weeks (n = 763)
CES‐D	400 (92; 705)	1.79 (− .12; 3.70)	224	96	1	0	3
Response	400 (92; 705)	.10 (.03; .17)	3,903	98	1	0	1
QALYs	400 (92; 705)	.01 (.00; .01)	81,155	98	1	0	1
6 months (n = 1,163)
CES‐D	211 (− 355; 787)	2.17 (.70; 3.64)	97	74	26	0	0
Response	211 (− 355; 787)	.07 (.01; .13)	3,158	73	26	0	1
QALYs	211 (− 355; 787)	.01 (− .00; .02)	32,706	65	24	2	9
12 months (n = 906)
CES‐D	406 (− 611; 1,444)	1.75 (− .09; 3.60)	232	72	25	1	3
Response	406 (− 611; 1,444)	.06 (− .02; .13)	7,079	68	24	2	6
QALYs	406 (− 611; 1,444)	−.00 (− .03; .03)	−1,122,646	33	16	9	42
Sensitivity analysis^a
SA1: Human capital approach
CES‐D	1,328 (− 32; 2,716)	1.75 (− .09; 3.60)	758	90	6	0	3
Response	1,328 (− 32; 2,716)	.06 (− .02; .13)	23,140	87	6	0	7
QALYs	1,328 (− 32; 2,716)	−.00 (− .03; .03)	−23,210,980	45	5	2	49
SA2: National healthcare provider
CES‐D	442 (117; 824)	1.76 (− .09; 3.60)	251	95	2	0	3
Response	442 (117; 824)	.06 (− .02; .13)	7,698	91	2	0	7
QALYs	442 (117; 824)	−.00 (− .03; .03)	−1,220,857	47	1	1	51
SA3: Increased costs by 25%
CES‐D	508 (− 764; 1,808)	1.75 (− .09; 3.60)	289	72	25	1	3
Response	508 (− 764; 1,808)	.06 (− .02; .13)	8,848	69	24	2	6
QALYs	508 (− 764; 1,808)	−.00 (− .03; .03)	−1,403,308	33	16	9	42
SA4: Decreased costs by 25%
CES‐D	305 (− 458; 1,082)	1.75 (− .09; 3.60)	174	72	25	1	3
Response	305 (− 458; 1,082)	.06 (− .02; .13)	5,039	69	24	2	6
QALYs	305 (− 458; 1,082)	−.00 (− .03; .03)	−841,985	33	16	9	42
SA5: Complete case (n = 482)
CES‐D	−62 (− 1,304; 1,202)	2.7 (.92; 4.62)	−23	47	53	0	0
Response	−62 (− 1,304; 1,202)	.12 (.03; .20)	−539	47	53	0	0
QALYs	−62 (− 1,304; 1,202)	.01 (− .01; .03)	−8,365	31	42	11	17
SA6: Per protocol (n = 681)
CES‐D	279 (− 935; 1,524)	2.36 (.41; 4.62)	118	66	34	0	1
Response	279 (− 935; 1,524)	.07 (− .02; .16)	4,070	62	32	2	5
QALYs	279 (− 935; 1,524)	.01 (− .02; .03)	39,102	44	28	6	22
SA7: Recruited from general population^c (n = 663)
CES‐D	59 (− 673; 750)	3.17 (1.84; 4.51)	18	55	45	0	0
Response	59 (− 673; 750)	12 (.05; .18)	504	55	45	0	0
QALYs	59 (− 673; 750)	.01 (− .01; .02)	15,437	39	34	11	16
SA8: Reliable change index	406 (− 611; 1,444)	.07 (− .01; .14)	5,971	71	26	1	3

Notes: CES‐D = Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (range:0‐6‐); QALYs = Quality‐Adjusted Life‐years (range: 0–1); ΔC = Mean difference in costs; ΔE = Mean difference in effects.

Sensitivity analyses conducted at 12‐month follow‐up. N = 906 unless otherwise specified.

The northeast (NE) quadrant of the CE plane indicates that the Internet‐based intervention is more effective and more expensive than the control condition; The southeast (SE) quadrant of the CE plane indicates that the Internet‐based intervention is more effective and less expensive than the control condition; The southwest (SW) quadrant of the CE plane indicates that the Internet‐based intervention is less effective and more expensive than the control condition; The northwest (NW) quadrant indicates that the Internet‐based intervention is less effective and more expensive than the control condition.

This sensitivity analysis was conducted at 6 months follow‐up because at 12 months only one study was conducted in primary care