Digital Remote Monitoring Using an mHealth Solution for Survivors of Cancer: Protocol for a Pilot Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Healthy lifestyle interventions have a positive impact on multiple disease trajectories, including cancer-related outcomes. Specifically, appropriate habitual physical activity, adequate sleep, and a regular wholesome diet are of paramount importance for the wellness and supportive care of survivors of cancer. Mobile health (mHealth) apps have the potential to support novel tailored lifestyle interventions. OBJECTIVE: This observational pilot study aims to assess the feasibility of mHealth multidimensional longitudinal monitoring in survivors of cancer. The primary objective is to test the compliance (user engagement) with the monitoring solution. Secondary objectives include recording clinically relevant subjective and objective measures collected through the digital solution. METHODS: This is a monocentric pilot study taking place in Bangor, Wales, United Kingdom. We plan to enroll up to 100 adult survivors of cancer not receiving toxic anticancer treatment, who will provide self-reported behavioral data recorded via a dedicated app and validated questionnaires and objective data automatically collected by a paired smartwatch over 16 weeks. The participants will continue with their normal routine surveillance care for their cancer. The primary end point is feasibility (eg, mHealth monitoring acceptability). Composite secondary end points include clinically relevant patient-reported outcome measures (eg, the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System score) and objective physiological measures (eg, step counts). This trial received a favorable ethical review in May 2023 (Integrated Research Application System 301068). RESULTS: This study is part of an array of pilots within a European Union funded project, entitled "GATEKEEPER," conducted at different sites across Europe and covering various chronic diseases. Study accrual is anticipated to commence in January 2024 and continue until June 2024. It is hypothesized that mHealth monitoring will be feasible in survivors of cancer; specifically, at least 50% (50/100) of the participants will engage with the app at least once a week in 8 of the 16 study weeks. CONCLUSIONS: In a population with potentially complex clinical needs, this pilot study will test the feasibility of multidimensional remote monitoring of patient-reported outcomes and physiological parameters. Satisfactory compliance with the use of the app and smartwatch, whether confirmed or infirmed through this study, will be propaedeutic to the development of innovative mHealth interventions in survivors of cancer. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/52957.

A systematic review on experimental studies about patient adherence to treatment.

A better understanding of patients' adherence to treatment is a prerequisite to maximize the benefit of healthcare provision for patients, reduce treatment costs, and is a key factor in a variety of subsequent health outcomes. We aim to understand the state of the art of scientific evidence about which factors influence patients' adherence to treatment. A systematic literature review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines in five separate electronic databases of scientific publications: PubMed, PsycINFO (ProQuest), Cochrane library (Ovid), Google Scholar, and Web of Science. The search focused on literature reporting the significance of factors in adherence to treatment between 2011 and 2021, including only experimental studies (e.g., randomized controlled trials [RCT], clinical trials, etc.). We included 47 experimental studies. The results of the systematic review (SR) are grouped according to predetermined categories of the World Health Organization (WHO): socioeconomic, treatment, condition, personal, and healthcare-related factors. This review gives an actual overview of evidence-based studies on adherence and analyzed the significance of factors defined by the WHO classification. By showing the strength of certain factors in several independent studies and concomitantly uncovering gaps in research, these insights could serve as a basis for the design of future adherence studies and models.

Preferences in the Willingness to Download an mHealth App: Discrete Choice Experimental Study in Spain, Germany, and the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Despite the worldwide growth in mobile health (mHealth) tools and the possible benefits for both patients and health care providers, the adoption of mHealth is low, and only a limited number of studies have examined the intention to download mHealth apps. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we investigated individuals' preferences in the adoption of a health app. METHODS: We conducted a discrete choice experimental study in 3 countries (Spain: n=800, Germany: n=800, and the Netherlands: n=416) with 4 different attributes and levels (ie, price: €1.99 vs €4.99 [a currency exchange rate of €1=US $1.09 is applicable] vs for free, data protection: data protection vs no information, recommendation: patients' association vs doctors, and manufacturer: medical association vs pharmaceutical company). Participants were randomly assigned. For the analyses, we used the conditional logistic model separately for each country. RESULTS: The results showed that price and data protection were considered important factors that significantly increased the probability to download an mHealth app. In general, the source of the recommendation and the manufacturer affected the probability to download the mHealth app less. However, in Germany and the Netherlands, we found that if the app was manufactured by a pharmaceutical company, the probability to download the mHealth app decreased. CONCLUSIONS: mHealth tools are highly promising to reduce health care costs and increase the effectiveness of traditional health interventions and therapies. Improving data protection, reducing costs, and creating sound business models are the major driving forces to increase the adoption of mHealth apps in the future. It is thereby essential to create trustworthy standards for mobile apps, whereby prices, legislation concerning data protection, and health professionals can have a leading role to inform the potential consumers.

GATEKEEPER's Strategy for the Multinational Large-Scale Piloting of an eHealth Platform: Tutorial on How to Identify Relevant Settings and Use Cases.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization's strategy toward healthy aging fosters person-centered integrated care sustained by eHealth systems. However, there is a need for standardized frameworks or platforms accommodating and interconnecting multiple of these systems while ensuring secure, relevant, fair, trust-based data sharing and use. The H2020 project GATEKEEPER aims to implement and test an open-source, European, standard-based, interoperable, and secure framework serving broad populations of aging citizens with heterogeneous health needs. OBJECTIVE: We aim to describe the rationale for the selection of an optimal group of settings for the multinational large-scale piloting of the GATEKEEPER platform. METHODS: The selection of implementation sites and reference use cases (RUCs) was based on the adoption of a double stratification pyramid reflecting the overall health of target populations and the intensity of proposed interventions; the identification of a principles guiding implementation site selection; and the elaboration of guidelines for RUC selection, ensuring clinical relevance and scientific excellence while covering the whole spectrum of citizen complexities and intervention intensities. RESULTS: Seven European countries were selected, covering Europe's geographical and socioeconomic heterogeneity: Cyprus, Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland, Spain, and the United Kingdom. These were complemented by the following 3 Asian pilots: Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan. Implementation sites consisted of local ecosystems, including health care organizations and partners from industry, civil society, academia, and government, prioritizing the highly rated European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Aging reference sites. RUCs covered the whole spectrum of chronic diseases, citizen complexities, and intervention intensities while privileging clinical relevance and scientific rigor. These included lifestyle-related early detection and interventions, using artificial intelligence-based digital coaches to promote healthy lifestyle and delay the onset or worsening of chronic diseases in healthy citizens; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and heart failure decompensations management, proposing integrated care management based on advanced wearable monitoring and machine learning (ML) to predict decompensations; management of glycemic status in diabetes mellitus, based on beat to beat monitoring and short-term ML-based prediction of glycemic dynamics; treatment decision support systems for Parkinson disease, continuously monitoring motor and nonmotor complications to trigger enhanced treatment strategies; primary and secondary stroke prevention, using a coaching app and educational simulations with virtual and augmented reality; management of multimorbid older patients or patients with cancer, exploring novel chronic care models based on digital coaching, and advanced monitoring and ML; high blood pressure management, with ML-based predictions based on different intensities of monitoring through self-managed apps; and COVID-19 management, with integrated management tools limiting physical contact among actors. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides a methodology for selecting adequate settings for the large-scale piloting of eHealth frameworks and exemplifies with the decisions taken in GATEKEEPER the current views of the WHO and European Commission while moving forward toward a European Data Space.

The impact of labour market shocks on mental health: evidence from the Covid-19 first wave.

In this study, we estimate the effect of a negative labour market shock on individuals' levels of stress, anxiety, and depression. We use a dataset collected during the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic, on a representative sample of citizens from Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom, interviewed on three occasions. We measure stress, anxiety and depression and labour shocks using validated scales. Our research design is a standard difference-in-differences model: we leverage the differential timing of shocks to identify the impact on mental health. In our estimations, a negative labour shock increases the measure of stress, anxiety, and depression by 16% of a standard deviation computed from the baseline.

"Meating halfway": Exploring the attitudes of meat eaters, veg*ns, and occasional meat eaters toward those who eat meat and those who do not eat meat.

Empirical studies have persistently reported negative attitudes of meat eaters toward vegetarians and vegans (veg*ns), but scant attention has been paid to veg*ns' attitudes toward meat eaters. We aimed to investigate the attitudes of meat eaters and veg*ns from both perspectives. In addition, we explored the attitudes of occasional meat eaters. We performed a cross-sectional study (Study 1) among meat eaters, veg*ns, and occasional meat eaters, as well as a content analysis of publicly available tweets (Study 2). Study 1 (N = 477, Mage = 23.45, SD = 5.91) showed that the attitudes of veg*ns toward meat eaters are significantly more negative compared to the attitudes of meat eaters toward veg*ns, but both were lower than the midpoint on scales measuring negative attitudes toward the other. Study 2 showed that only a small portion (<1%) of tweets (N = 1,328) on meat eating or veg*nism contained signs of negative attitudes. The two studies provide little evidence of the existence of strong negative attitudes.

Front-of-pack labels: "Directive" versus "informative" approaches.

Front-of-pack labels (FOPLs) aim at communicating to consumers the health value of food items in support of public health policies. Two main types can be discerned: directive and semidirective FOPLs using color schemes (e.g., Nutri-Score) and informative FOPLs (e.g., Nutrinform Battery). Directive approaches tend to show a "wear-out effect" and, additionally, they tend to have various underlying conceptual problems. Usually, their nutritional scores are calculated using changing, arbitrary algorithms and involve a reductionist set of parameters of debatable validity. Thus, they overstate the effects of selected nutritional factors, such as saturated fat and energy, while overlooking the food matrix and the more holistic aspects of nourishment. Moreover, they do not reflect the portion that is consumed, ignore the preparation steps at home, and fail to serve as a useful basis for composing a healthy diet. Also, so long as the nutritional formulations match the algorithmic standards, they tend to allow ultra-processed products. Thus, this might confuse and mislead consumers. Overconfidence in green-colored labels could even result in unbalanced dietary choices, whereas avoidance of red products may eliminate certain foods from the diet that are rich in essential nutrients (e.g., cheese), leading to opposite results than aimed for. The latter is particularly relevant to vulnerable populations, such as the young, pregnant women, and older adults, or for individuals with specific needs. Taken together, directive FOPLs such as Nutri-Score contradict the declared intent of the European Commission to empower consumers to undertake healthy and balanced diets based on easily accessible and robust information. Although informative systems usually also keep the focus on a few selected nutritional parameters, they have are less paternalizing and obviate the need to classify foods as healthy or unhealthy. They also focus attention on the individual portions that are consumed (even if the definition of portion size remains contentious). Given the importance of dietary patterns, rather than individual foods or nutrients, directiveFOPLs of the Nutri-Score type represent a regretful case of nutritionism. Finally, attempts to associate the adoption of a FOPL with an improvement in the health status are few and mainly applied in virtual settings; none of which are longitudinal, nor have they been able to identify a causal link.

A Systematic Review of Patient Engagement Experiences in Brain Disorders.

Background: Patient engagement is increasingly considered to be an important element in the treatment of brain disorders to optimise outcomes for patients, society, and healthcare systems. Nonetheless, scientific research examining methodologies to engage patients with brain diseases in Research and Innovation (R&I) is scarce. Aim: To review existing scientific evidence regarding the engagement of patients with brain disorders in research and innovation. Methods: Studies were retrieved from several bibliographic databases (publication date between January 2016 and April 2019) with pre-specified selection criteria. Results: In total, 49 articles were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria and were reviewed systematically. Results showed that there is limited evidence available on the impact and (cost-) effectiveness of patient engagement in (brain) research and innovation. Most published studies are protocols, guidelines, and discussion articles for patient engagement in health research and innovation. Overall, there exists a general consensus to engage patients in every step of the research procedure. Relevant evidence identified includes principles of engagement, definitions of stakeholder types, key considerations for planning, conducting and disseminating engaged research, potential engagement activities, and examples of promising practices. Discussion: Findings are inconclusive due to methodological differences. Comparison between studies was difficult due to differences in patients, form of engagements, and total duration of engagement of patients. Experiences of patient engagement mainly concern adherence to medical treatments or participation of "expert patients" in clinical trials, but very rarely the governance of R&I according to the dictates of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). More structuralized, well-conducted and comparable Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are needed to be able to make evidence-based recommendations on how to increase effective patient engagement in research and innovation and assess the impact and (cost)-effectiveness.

Preferences in the Willingness to Download a COVID-19 Contact Tracing App in the Netherlands and Turkey: Experimental Study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the worldwide growth in using COVID-19 contact tracing apps (CTAs) and the potential benefits for citizens, governments, health care professionals, businesses, and other organizations, only a few studies have examined the factors affecting the levels of willingness to download a CTA. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate individuals' preferences in the willingness to download a health app. METHODS: We conducted an experimental study in 2 countries, the Netherlands (N=62) and Turkey (N=83), using 4 different vignettes (ie, data protection, manufacturer, reward, and gaming models) with different attributes. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of the conditions within the vignettes. RESULTS: The results showed that data protection and gaming elements are factors that influence the willingness to download a COVID-19 CTA. More specifically, we see that data protection is an important factor explaining the willingness to download the app in Turkey, whereas including gaming elements significantly affects the willingness to download the app in the Netherlands. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 CTAs are highly promising to reduce the spread of the virus and make it easier to open up society faster, especially because they can be used quickly and share information rapidly. COVID-19 CTA developers must ensure that their apps satisfactorily and sufficiently address ethical considerations, even in times of crisis. Furthermore, integrating gaming elements in the CTA could enhance the willingness to download the CTA.

Effect of Source Type and Protective Message on the Critical Evaluation of News Messages on Facebook: Randomized Controlled Trial in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Disinformation has become an increasing societal concern, especially due to the speed that news is shared in the digital era. In particular, disinformation in the health care sector can lead to serious casualties, as the current COVID-19 crisis clearly shows. OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to experimentally examine the effects of information about the source and a protective warning message on users' critical evaluation of news items, as well as the perception of accuracy of the news item. METHODS: A 3 (unreliable vs reliable vs no identified source) × 2 (with protective message vs without) between-subject design was conducted among 307 participants (mean age 29 (SD 10.9] years). RESULTS: The results showed a significant effect of source information on critical evaluation. In addition, including a protective message did not significantly affect critical evaluation. The results showed no interaction between type of source and protective message on critical evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results, it is questionable whether including protective messages to improve critical evaluation is a way to move forward and improve critical evaluation of health-related news items, although effective methodologies to tackle the spread of disinformation are highly needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05030883; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05030883.

Playing with fruit: An experimental study to test the effectiveness of an online memory advergame to promote children's fruit consumption.

OBJECTIVE: Literature on food marketing targeting young people reveals that in the last years, sophisticated marketing techniques have been developed to market predominantly unhealthy food products. Much research has been conducted to test the impact of these techniques on subsequent product selection and intake. Less is known about the effects of promoting healthier foods, although the health-related benefits of eating more fruit and vegetables for children are important. The main aim of the present experiment was to examine if an online advergame promoting a fruit brand with food products increased subsequent fruit intake by children. METHODS: We used a randomized between-subject design with 123 children (age: 7-13 years) who played an advergame that promoted fruit (n = 43), non-food products (n = 40), or were in the control condition (n = 40). Subsequently, we measured the free intake of fruit as main outcome. RESULTS: Playing the advergame promoting fruit did not stimulate the subsequent intake of fruit. Children in the advergame with fruit ate similar amounts of fruit than children in the control condition. No moderation effects of BMI, hunger, sex and game attitude were found. In addition, Bayesian analyses have been conducted that support the null hypothesis. DISCUSSION: Previous research has shown that marketing of unhealthy products via advergames affects subsequent intake of the promoted product, but the same effect is not found for healthier foods. We suggest that future research should examine if longer exposure or different forms of novel food marketing are effective in increasing the intake of healthier foods. Until now, it is unclear if advergames as a marketing technique for healthy foods have the same effectiveness on the intake of healthier food products.

Can Product Information Steer towards Sustainable and Healthy Food Choices? A Pilot Study in an Online Supermarket.

Sustainable dietary choices have become increasingly important because of the current environmental threats the world is facing. Nonetheless, consumers find it difficult to assess a product's sustainability and therefore make better choices. This pilot study tested whether explanatory product information about sustainability increased sustainable purchases in an online supermarket and whether additional health information increased message effectiveness. Perceived consumer effectiveness (i.e., the perception of the degree to which individual actions can contribute to environmental problems) and green skepticism were hypothesized to mediate the effect of message type, and environmental attitudes were included as the moderator. An experiment using a one-factor design was conducted among 101 participants who were assigned to one of three experimental conditions: sustainability claim only, explanatory sustainability claim, and explanatory sustainability and health claim. Analyses showed that an explanatory sustainability claim (regardless of whether this claim was accompanied by a health claim) led to fewer sustainable purchases through perceived consumer effectiveness but only for those with low environmental attitudes. No effects were found for the addition of a health claim. The results from this pilot provide insight for future studies that aim to examine how online supermarkets should communicate to increase sustainable purchases.

Cost-Effectiveness Assessment of Internet of Things in Smart Cities.

With the ongoing rapid urbanization of city regions and the growing need for (cost-)effective healthcare provision, governments need to address urban challenges with smart city interventions. In this context, impact assessment plays a key role in the decision-making process of assessing cost-effectiveness of Internet of Things-based health service applications in cities, as it identifies the interventions that can obtain the best results for citizens' health and well-being. We present a new methodology to evaluate smart city projects and interventions through the MAFEIP tool, a recent online tool for cost-effectiveness analysis that has been used extensively to test information and communications technology solutions for healthy aging. Resting on the principles of Markov models, the purpose of the MAFEIP tool is to estimate the outcomes of a large variety of social and technological innovations, by providing an early assessment of the likelihood of achieving anticipated impacts through interventions of choice. Thus, the analytical model suggested in this article provides smart city projects with an evidence-based assessment to improve their efficiency and effectivity, by comparing the costs and the efforts invested, with the corresponding results.

A Protocol Study to Establish Psychological Outcomes From the Use of Wearables for Health and Fitness Monitoring.

Background: The last few decades people have increasingly started to use technological tools for health and activity monitoring, such as tracking apps and wearables. The main assumption is that these tools are effective in reinforcing self-empowerment because they support better-informed lifestyle decision-making. However, experimental research assessing the effectiveness of the technological tools on such psychological outcomes is limited. Methods and Design: Three studies will be conducted. First, we will perform a systematic review to examine the experimental evidence on the effects of self-tracking apps on psychological outcome measurements. Second, we will conduct a longitudinal field experiment with a between subject design. Participants (N = 150) begin a 50-day exercise program, either with or without the aid of the self-tracking app Strava. Among those who use Strava, we vary between those who use all features and those who use a limited set of features. Participants complete questionnaires at baseline, at 10, 25, and 50 days, and provide details on what information has been tracked via the platform. Third, a subset of participants is interviewed to acquire additional qualitative data. The study will provide a rich set of data, enabling triangulation, and contextualization of the findings. Discussion: People increasingly engage in self-tracking whereby they use technological tools for health and activity monitoring, although the effects are still unknown. Considering the mixed results of the existing evidence, it is difficult to draw firm conclusions, showing more research is needed to develop a comprehensive understanding. Trial registration: Netherlands Trial registration: NL9402, received on 20 April 2021; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/9402.

The Effect of a Serious Health Game on Children's Eating Behavior: Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Currently, children's dietary intake patterns do not meet prescribed dietary guidelines. Consequently, childhood obesity is one of the most serious health concerns. Therefore, innovative methods need to be developed and tested in order to effectively improve the dietary intake of children. Teaching children how to cope with the overwhelming number of unhealthy food cues could be conducted effectively by serious health games. OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to examine the effect of a serious health computer game on young children's eating behavior and attitudes toward healthy and unhealthy foods. METHODS: A cluster-randomized controlled trial with a between-group design was conducted (n=157; 8-12 years), wherein children played a game that promoted a healthy lifestyle or attended regular classes and did not play a game (control). The game was designed in collaboration with researchers and pilot-tested among a group of children repeatedly before conducting the experiment. After 1 week of playing, attitudes toward food snacks and actual intake (children could eat ad libitum from fruits or energy-dense snacks) was assessed. RESULTS: The results showed that playing a serious health game did not have an effect on attitude toward fruits or energy-dense snacks or on the intake of fruits or less energy-dense snacks. Additional Bayesian analyses supported these findings. CONCLUSIONS: Serious health games are increasingly considered to be a potential effective intervention when it comes to behavior change. The results of the current study stress the importance of tailoring serious health games in order to be effective, because no effect was found on attitude or eating behavior. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05025995; https://tinyurl.com/mdd7wrjd.

Cost-utility analysis of a consensus and evidence-based medication review to optimize and potentially reduce psychotropic drug prescription in institutionalized dementia patients.

BACKGROUND: Growing evidence shows the effects of psychotropic drugs on the evolution of dementia. Until now, only a few studies have evaluated the cost-effectiveness of psychotropic drugs in institutionalized dementia patients. This study aims to assess the cost-utility of intervention performed in the metropolitan area of Barcelona (Spain) (MN) based on consensus between specialized caregivers involved in the management of dementia patients for optimizing and potentially reducing the prescription of inappropriate psychotropic drugs in this population. This analysis was conducted using the Monitoring and Assessment Framework for the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (MAFEIP) tool. METHODS: The MAFEIP tool builds up from a variety of surrogate endpoints commonly used across different studies in order to estimate health and economic outcomes in terms of incremental changes in quality adjusted life years (QALYs), as well as health and social care utilization. Cost estimates are based on scientific literature and expert opinion; they are direct costs and include medical visits, hospital care, medical tests and exams and drugs administered, among other concepts. The healthcare costs of patients using the intervention were calculated by means of a medication review that compared patients' drug-related costs before, during and after the use of the intervention conducted in MN between 2012 and 2014. The cost-utility analysis was performed from the perspective of a health care system with a time horizon of 12 months. RESULTS: The tool calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the intervention, revealing it to be dominant, or rather, better (more effective) and cheaper than the current (standard) care. The ICER of the intervention was in the lower right quadrant, making it an intervention that is always accepted even with the lowest given Willingness to Pay (WTP) threshold value (€15,000). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study show that the intervention was dominant, or rather, better (more effective) and cheaper than the current (standard) care. This dominant intervention is therefore recommended to interested investors for systematic application.

Restarting "Normal" Life after Covid-19 and the Lockdown: Evidence from Spain, the United Kingdom, and Italy.

In this article, we examine the expectations of the economic outlook, fear of the future, and behavioural change during the first Covid-19 wave, for three European countries (Spain, the United Kingdom, and Italy) that have been severely hit. We use a novel dataset that we collected to monitor the three countries during the crisis. As outcome variables, we used expectations (e.g., economic outlook, labour market situation, recovery), fear (e.g., scenario of new outburst, economic depression, restriction to individual rights and freedom), and behavioural change across the following dimensions: savings, cultural consumption, social capital, and risky behaviour. We provide descriptive evidence that is representative of the population of interest, and we estimate the impact of exposure to shock occurred during the crisis on the same outcome variables, using matching techniques. Our main findings are the following: we detected systematically negative expectations regarding the future and the recovery, majoritarian fears of an economic depression, a new outbreak, and a permanent restriction on freedom, a reduction in saving and in social capital. Exposure to shocks decreased expected job prospects, increased withdrawal from accumulated savings, and reduced contacts with the network relevant to job advancement, whereas it had inconclusive effects over fears. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11205-021-02697-5.

Guided Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression: Implementation Cost-Effectiveness Study.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder is a chronic condition; its prevalence is expected to grow with the aging trend of high-income countries. Internet-based cognitive-behavioral therapy has proven efficacy in treating major depressive disorder. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of implementing a community internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy intervention (Super@, the Spanish program for the MasterMind project) for treating major depressive disorder. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness of the Super@ program was assessed with the Monitoring and Assessment Framework for the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing tool, using a 3-state Markov model. Data from the cost and effectiveness of the intervention were prospectively collected from the implementation of the program by a health care provider in Badalona, Spain; the corresponding data for usual care were gathered from the literature. The health states, transition probabilities, and utilities were computed using Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores. RESULTS: The analysis was performed using data from 229 participants using the Super@ program. Results showed that the intervention was more costly than usual care; the discounted (3%) and nondiscounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were €29,367 and €26,484 per quality-adjusted life-year, respectively (approximately US $35,299 and $31,833, respectively). The intervention was cost-effective based on the €30,000 willingness-to-pay threshold typically applied in Spain (equivalent to approximately $36,060). According to the deterministic sensitivity analyses, the potential reduction of costs associated with intervention scale-up would reduce the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the intervention, although it remained more costly than usual care. A discount in the incremental effects up to 5% exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000. CONCLUSIONS: The Super@ program, an internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy intervention for treating major depressive disorder, cost more than treatment as usual. Nevertheless, its implementation in Spain would be cost-effective from health care and societal perspectives, given the willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000 compared with treatment as usual.

Negative shocks predict change in cognitive function and preferences: assessing the negative affect and stress hypothesis.

In the context of the current COVID-19 pandemic, households throughout the world have to cope with negative shocks. Previous research has shown that negative shocks impair cognitive function and change risk, time and social preferences. In this study, we analyze the results of a longitudinal multi-country survey conducted in Italy (N = 1652), Spain (N = 1660) and the United Kingdom (N = 1578). We measure cognitive function using the Cognitive Reflection Test and preferences traits (risk, time and social preferences) using an experimentally validated set of questions to assess the differences between people exposed to a shock compared to the rest of the sample. We measure four possible types of shocks: labor market shock, health shock, occurrence of stressful events, and mental health shock. Additionally, we randomly assign participants to groups with either a recall of negative events (more specifically, a mild reinforcement of stress or of fear/anxiety), or to a control group (to recall neutral or joyful memories), in order to assess whether or not stress and negative emotions drive a change in preferences. Results show that people affected by shocks performed worse in terms of cognitive functioning, are more risk loving, and are more prone to punish others (negative reciprocity). Data do not support the hypotheses that the result is driven by stress or by negative emotions.