The Cost-Effectiveness of a Novel Online Social Therapy to Maintain Treatment Effects From First-Episode Psychosis Services: Results From the Horyzons Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Digital interventions have potential applications in promoting long-term recovery and improving outcomes in first-episode psychosis (FEP). This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Horyzons, a novel online social therapy to support young people aged 16-27 years following discharge from FEP services, compared with treatment as usual (TAU) from a healthcare sector and a societal perspective. STUDY DESIGN: A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), based on the change in social functioning, and a cost-utility analysis (CUA) using quality-adjusted life years were undertaken alongside a randomized controlled trial. Intervention costs were determined from study records; resources used by patients were collected from a resource-use questionnaire and administrative data. Mean costs and outcomes were compared at 18 months and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. Uncertainty analysis using bootstrapping and sensitivity analyses was conducted. STUDY RESULTS: The sample included 170 participants: Horyzons intervention group (n = 86) and TAU (n = 84). Total costs were significantly lower in the Horyzons group compared with TAU from both the healthcare sector (-AU$4789.59; P < .001) and the societal perspective (-AU$5131.14; P < .001). In the CEA, Horyzons was dominant, meaning it was less costly and resulted in better social functioning. In the CUA, the Horyzons intervention resulted in fewer costs but also yielded fewer QALYs. However, group differences in outcomes were not statistically significant. When young people engaged more with the platform, costs were shown to decrease and outcomes improved. CONCLUSIONS: The Horyzons intervention offers a cost-effective approach for improving social functioning in young people with FEP after discharge from early intervention services.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".