MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415004824 · doi:10.1055/a-2708-5194

Prospective Economic Evaluation Alongside the Telephone-Based Nurse-Delivered Interpersonal Psychotherapy for Postpartum Depression Trial

2025· article· en· W4415004824 on OpenAlexaffabout
Susanne Hay, Cindy‐Lee Dennis, Paula Ravitz, Sophie Grigoriadis, Elise Maddalone, Dmitry Dukhovny, John A. F. Zupancic

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Perinatology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic evaluationInterpersonal psychotherapyPostpartum depressionRandomized controlled trialPostpartum periodClinical trialDepression (economics)Public healthTreatment and control groupsInterpersonal communication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: , 2020). The economic implications of this therapy have not been explored. We aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of telephone-based, nurse-delivered IPT compared with standard postpartum care, using resource utilization data collected alongside the clinical study. Study Design: We conducted a prospectively planned economic evaluation using patient-level data from the IPT trial, which enrolled 241 mothers with PPD. We considered costs from a societal perspective, measuring direct medical costs from study logs and secondary sources, as well as evaluating costs borne by the mother and family (including both medical and non-medical expenditures) and wage losses through questionnaires. We used a time horizon of 12 weeks post-randomization, corresponding to the endpoint of the clinical trial. Costs are reported in (2022) Canadian dollars. Results: = 0.234). When costs and effects were combined, the societal expenditure was $5,397 for each additional patient without PPD. Conclusion: Telephone-based, nurse-delivered IPT, as employed in this trial, showed no statistically significant differences in costs compared with standard care but resulted in improved clinical outcomes. Although associated with moderate uncertainty, the resulting incremental cost-effectiveness was well within the acceptable range for medical interventions in this population, and telephone-based, nurse-delivered IPT should be considered for patients with PPD. Key Points: · Telephone-based, nurse-delivered IPT is effective in treating PPD.. · We performed an economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial of IPT, using patient-level data and considering costs from a societal perspective.. · Patients in the IPT group had more phone calls with public health nurses and fewer visits to psychiatrists, with overall similar costs between the two groups.. · The societal expenditure was $5,397 for each additional patient without PPD, which is well within the acceptable range for medical interventions in this population.. · Telephone-based, nurse-delivered IPT should be considered for cost-effective care of patients with PPD..

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.346 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PerinatologySame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207