Cited by 30Eating Disorders and BehaviorsHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeDigital Mental Health Interventions

Cost‐utility of an internet‐based intervention with or without therapist support in comparison with a waiting list for individuals with eating disorder symptoms: a randomized controlled trial

Open access
Aardoom, J.J., Dingemans, A.E., van Ginkel, J.R., Spinhoven, P., Van Furth, E.F., Van den Akker‐van Marle, M.E.·2016·International Journal of Eating Disorders

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the cost‐utility of the internet‐based intervention “Featback” provided with different levels of therapist support, in comparison to a waiting list. Method: This economic evaluation was conducted from a societal perspective and was part of a randomized controlled trial in which participants (N = 354) with self‐reported ED symptoms were randomized to: (1) 8 weeks of Featback, consisting of psychoeducation and a fully automated monitoring‐ and feedback system, (2) Featback with low‐intensity (weekly) therapist support, (3) Featback with high‐intensity (three times a week) therapist support, and (4) a waiting list. Participants were assessed at baseline, postintervention, and 3‐month follow‐up. Cost‐utility acceptability curves were constructed. Results: No significant differences between the study conditions were found regarding quality‐adjusted life‐years (P = 0.55) and societal costs (P = 0.45), although the mean costs per participant were lowest in the Featback condition with low‐intensity therapist support (€1951), followed by Featback with high‐intensity therapist support (€2032), Featback without therapist support (€2102), and the waiting list (€2582). Featback seemed to be cost‐effective as compared to the waiting list. No clear preference was found for Featback with or without therapist support. Discussion: A fully automated Internet‐based intervention for ED symptoms with no, low‐, or high‐intensity therapist support represented good value for money when compared to a waiting list. This finding may have important implications for clinical practice, as both the unguided‐ and guided intervention could allow for more efficient care and widespread dissemination, potentially increasing the accessibility and availability of mental health care services for individuals with ED symptoms. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (Int J Eat Disord 2016; 49:1068–1076)

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/eat.22587

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aardoom, J. J., Dingemans, A. E., van Ginkel, J. R., Spinhoven, P., Van Furth, E. F., & Van den Akker‐van Marle, M. E.
Affiliations
  • GGZ Rivierduinen (NL)
  • Institute of Education and Child Studies, Leiden University Leiden The Netherlands
  • Leiden University (NL)
  • Rivierduinen Eating Disorders Ursula Leiden The Netherlands
  • Department of Medical Decision Making Leiden University Medical Center Leiden The Netherlands
Corresponding author
Aardoom, J.J.
Venue
International Journal of Eating Disorders
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-07-21
Volume
49
Issue
12
Pages
1068-1076
ISSN
  • 0276-3478 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-108X
OpenAlex
W2498826386
Cited by
30
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4
FWCI
4.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • International Journal of Eating Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
European Commission's Executive Agency for Health and Consumers in the Health Program (20101209)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
eating disorder symptoms, online intervention, therapist support, cost-utility analysis, cost-effectiveness, automated feedback systems, psychoeducation, waiting lists, quality-adjusted life years, access to mental health care
MeSH terms
Adult, Feeding and Eating Disorders, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Patient Education as Topic, Quality of Life, Social Support, Waiting Lists, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Quality-Adjusted Life Years, Internet, Young Adult, Self Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review