Table 5.

Cost-effectiveness analyses and sensitivity analyses for rate of responders to treatment and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at 3-month follow-up.

Analysis		Incremental cost (€)	Incremental effect	Mean ICERa	Distribution of 5000 bootstrap simulated ICERs
					NEb	SEc (dominant)	SWd	NWe (inferior)
Cost effectiveness, rate of responders to treatment
	Main analysis	–225	0.07	Dominant	25.2	72.4	1.6	0.8
	Only including participants with paid job	–309	0.12	Dominant	25.0	74.6	0.3	0.1
	Analysis without baseline adjustments	–131	0.07	Dominant	33.7	63.9	1.4	1.0
	Health care perspective	–78	0.07	Dominant	17.1	80.5	1.9	0.5
	Including opportunity costs for participants	–225	0.07	Dominant	25.2	72.4	1.6	0.8
	Regression-based imputation	–127	0.07	Dominant	34.4	63.3	1.3	1.0
	Last observation carried forward	–784	0.05	Dominant	4.5	90.5	4.7	0.3
Cost utility, QALYs
	Main analysis	–225	0.12	Dominant	24.7	75.3	0	0
	Only including participants with paid job	–312	0.15	Dominant	24.9	75.1	0	0
	Analysis without baseline adjustments	–131	0.12	Dominant	34.7	65.3	0	0
	Health care perspective	–85	0.12	Dominant	16.1	83.9	0	0
	Including opportunity costs for participants	–228	0.12	Dominant	25.7	74.3	0	0
	Regression-based imputation	–130	0.12	Dominant	35.1	64.9	0	0
	Last observation carried forward	–785	0.06	Dominant	4.8	95.0	0.2	0.1

^aICER: incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

^bNE: northeast quadrant (the intervention was more effective and more costly than usual care).

^cSE: southeast quadrant (the intervention was more effective and less costly than usual care).

^dSW: southwest quadrant (the intervention was less effective and less costly than usual care).

^eNW: northwest quadrant (the intervention was less effective and more costly than usual care).