Table 9:
Effectiveness of Interventions, Reference Case Analysis: Mild to Moderate Major Depression
| Model Parameter | Mean (95%CI/SE)a | SMD (95%CI)* | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probability of response (improvement) | |||
| Unguided iCBT | 0.50 (0.28–0.62) | 0.27 (0.17–0.37) | Karyotaki, 201791 |
| Guided iCBT | 0.73 (0.66–0.77) | 0.83 (0.59–1.07) | Arnberg et al, 201420 |
| Individual face-to-face CBT | 0.73 (0.66–0.77) | NA | Dedert et al, 201723; Andrews et al, 201821; Adelman et al, 20147 |
| Group face-to-face CBT | 0.73 (0.66–0.77) | NA | Dedert et al, 201723; Andrews et al, 201821; Adelman et al, 20147 |
| Medication | 0.70 | Koeser et al, 201593 | |
| Probability of recovery | |||
| Unguided iCBT | 0.38 (0.09) | NA | Kaltenthaler et al, 200650 |
| Guided iCBT | 0.48 (0.23–0.60) | 0.22 (0.59–1.07) | Andrews et al, 201821 |
| Individual face-to-face CBT | 0.66 (0.64–0.71) | NAc | Biesheuvel-Leliefeld, 201696 |
| Group face-to-face CBT | 0.63 (0.59–0.66) | NAc | Churchill, 200197 |
| Medication | 0.62 (0.58–0.66) | NAc | Cipriani, 201498 |
Abbreviations: CBT, cognitive behavioural therapy, CI, confidence interval; iCBT, internet-delivered CBT; NA, not applicable; SE, standard error; SMD, standardized mean difference.
Original value, reported in the article and clinical review: probability of response/recovery was calculated by transforming SMD to log odds ratio using the formula: d × π/sqrt(3),95 and further calculated the probability of event based on the data of baseline probability of response.50
Beta distributions assigned in probabilistic sensitivity analysis to all parameters for which 95% CI or SE were specified in Table 9a. Two parameters of the beta distribution (α, β) are derived from the mean and SE (stated for each model parameter). Formulas for these calculations, derived from the mean and SE (provided in the Tree Age software) are α = ([Mean2] × [1 – Mean])/([SE2] – Mean); β = ([{1 – Mean} × {1 – Mean}] × Mean)/([SE2] – 1).
Reported risk of recurrence, in-person CBT vs. usual care in Biesheuvel-Leliefeld, 2016 (relative risk: 0.68, 95% CI 0.53–0.76) and group CBT, in Churchill, 2011 (0.78, 95% CI 0.69–0.93), and sertraline in Cipriani, 2014 (relative risk: 0.80, 95% CI 0.69–0.93) details provided in our prior report.77