Cited by 66Chronic Disease Management StrategiesMental Health Treatment and AccessDiabetes Management and Education

Long-term clinical and cost-effectiveness of collaborative care (versus usual care) for people with mental-physical multimorbidity: cluster-randomised trial

Open access
Camacho, Elizabeth M., Davies, Linda M., Hann, Mark, Small, Nicola, Bower, Peter, Chew-Graham, Carolyn, Baguely, Clare, Gask, Linda +5 more·2018·The British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Collaborative care can support the treatment of depression in people with long-term conditions, but long-term benefits and costs are unknown. Aims: To explore the long-term (24-month) effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of collaborative care in people with mental-physical multimorbidity. Method: A cluster randomised trial compared collaborative care (integrated physical and mental healthcare) with usual care for depression alongside diabetes and/or coronary heart disease. Depression symptoms were measured by the symptom checklist-depression scale (SCL-D13). The economic evaluation was from the perspective of the English National Health Service. Results: 191 participants were allocated to collaborative care and 196 to usual care. At 24 months, the mean SCL-D13 score was 0.27 (95% CI, −0.48 to −0.06) lower in the collaborative care group alongside a gain of 0.14 (95% CI, 0.06-0.21) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The cost per QALY gained was £13 069. Conclusions: In the long term, collaborative care reduces depression and is potentially cost-effective at internationally accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds. Declaration of interest: None.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1192/bjp.2018.70

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Belief in the superiority of an intervention, or researcher allegiance, has been associated with stronger observed effects of therapies, particularly in psychotherapy research.

    “Belief in the superiority of an intervention, or researcher allegiance, 583 has been associated with stronger observed effects of therapies, particularly in psychotherapy research. 584”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [13]National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Depression in Adults With a Chronic Physical Health Problem: Recognition and Management [CG91] NICE, 2009 (https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG91). 39808015
  2. [14]Derogatis LR, Cleary PA. Confirmation of the dimensional structure of the SCL-90: a study in construct validation. J Clin Psychol 1977; 33: 981–9.
  3. [16]National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. NICE, 2013 (https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg9/chapter/foreword). 27905712

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Camacho, E. M., Davies, L. M., Hann, M., Small, N., Bower, P., Chew-Graham, C., Baguely, C., Gask, L., Dickens, C. M., Lovell, K., Waheed, W., Gibbons, C. J., & Coventry, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Manchester Academic Health Science Centre (GB)
  • Health Education North West (GB)
  • University of Exeter (GB)
  • University of York (GB)
Corresponding author
Camacho, Elizabeth M.
Venue
The British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2018-05-15
Volume
213
Issue
2
Pages
456-463
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2794766259
Cited by
66
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 3
FWCI
6.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Keele Research Repository (Keele University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
collaborative care, depression, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, chronic disease, cost-effectiveness, quality-adjusted life years, usual care
MeSH terms
Multimorbidity, Aged, Coronary Disease, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Care Team, Primary Health Care, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Cluster Analysis, Linear Models, Delivery of Health Care, Integrated, Quality-Adjusted Life Years, Diabetes Complications

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