Economic evaluation of internet-based psychological interventions: a scoping review of methodological choices.

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Amira J Hariz, Karine Chevreul, Laure Daval, Mathilde Husson, Corinne Alberti, Morgane Michel
{"title":"Economic evaluation of internet-based psychological interventions: a scoping review of methodological choices.","authors":"Amira J Hariz, Karine Chevreul, Laure Daval, Mathilde Husson, Corinne Alberti, Morgane Michel","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2025.01.023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Internet-based psychological interventions hold promise for cost-effectiveness, yet their evaluation lacks standardisation, potentially leading to methodological discrepancies and inconclusive results. This study aims to conduct a scoping review of economic methods used when evaluating these interventions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Articles published between January 2015 and December 2020 were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, ECONLIT, and PsychINFO. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts of relevant publications, and extracted prespecified data. Outcomes related to intervention characteristics, comparators, perspective, time horizon, costs, benefits, economic endpoints, and uncertainty analysis methods were retrieved and synthetised narratively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 703 references and included 85. Seventy-four included a cost-utility analysis and 58 a cost-effectiveness analysis, with 47 carrying out both. The comparator was treatment as usual in 52 studies (61.2%) but varied widely across studies. A societal perspective was adopted in 60 studies, supplemented by a healthcare perspective in half. Time horizon was one year or less in 68 articles (80.0%). Intervention costs (71/85 studies) predominantly covered delivery costs (45/71 studies), while development and promotional costs were infrequently considered (respectively 14 and 5/71 studies). Interventions' reach, opportunity costs, user engagement and equity issues were rarely addressed. Key factors influencing cost-effectiveness included perspective, time horizon, costs included, and methods for handling missing data.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Assessment of cost-effectiveness in internet-based psychological interventions shows variability, potentially affecting efficiency evidence. Conventional methods are often favoured overlooking digital tools' specificities. Tailored guidelines for such evaluations could be helpful for standardised and reliable evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2025.01.023","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Internet-based psychological interventions hold promise for cost-effectiveness, yet their evaluation lacks standardisation, potentially leading to methodological discrepancies and inconclusive results. This study aims to conduct a scoping review of economic methods used when evaluating these interventions.

Methods: Articles published between January 2015 and December 2020 were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, ECONLIT, and PsychINFO. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts of relevant publications, and extracted prespecified data. Outcomes related to intervention characteristics, comparators, perspective, time horizon, costs, benefits, economic endpoints, and uncertainty analysis methods were retrieved and synthetised narratively.

Results: We identified 703 references and included 85. Seventy-four included a cost-utility analysis and 58 a cost-effectiveness analysis, with 47 carrying out both. The comparator was treatment as usual in 52 studies (61.2%) but varied widely across studies. A societal perspective was adopted in 60 studies, supplemented by a healthcare perspective in half. Time horizon was one year or less in 68 articles (80.0%). Intervention costs (71/85 studies) predominantly covered delivery costs (45/71 studies), while development and promotional costs were infrequently considered (respectively 14 and 5/71 studies). Interventions' reach, opportunity costs, user engagement and equity issues were rarely addressed. Key factors influencing cost-effectiveness included perspective, time horizon, costs included, and methods for handling missing data.

Conclusions: Assessment of cost-effectiveness in internet-based psychological interventions shows variability, potentially affecting efficiency evidence. Conventional methods are often favoured overlooking digital tools' specificities. Tailored guidelines for such evaluations could be helpful for standardised and reliable evidence.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Value in Health
Value in Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
3064
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信