Schizophrenia treatment in the developing world: an interregional and multinational cost-effectiveness analysis
Dan Chisholm, Oye Gureje, Sandra Saldivia, Marcelo Villalón Calderón, Rajitha Wickremasinghe, Nalaka Mendis, Jose-Luis Ayuso-Mateos, Shekhar Saxena
Volume 86, Number 7, July 2008, 542-551
Table 2. Schizophrenia treatment effect size estimates
| Intervention scenario | Effect size (ES) |
Source | Disability weight (0 = no disability) |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comparator | Value(SD improvement) | (Conversion =ES * 0.181)a | % improvementover null | ||||
| Null (no treatment) | – | – | 0.627 | – | |||
| Placebo | No treatment | 0.050 | 3 | 0.618 | −1% | ||
| Older antipsychotic drug | Placebo | 0.465 | 0.534 | −15% | |||
| Newer antipsychotic drug | Placebo | 0.495 | 0.528 | −16% | |||
| Older antipsychotic drug + psychosocial intervention | Older antipsychoticdrug | 0.390 | 0.463 | −26% | |||
| Newer antipsychotic drug + psychosocial intervention | Older antipsychoticdrug | 0.390 | 0.458 | −27% | |||
DALY, disability-adjusted life year; ES, effect size; SD, standard deviation.a Andrews et al.29 obtained health state preference scores/utility values for a series of health states reflecting 1 SD improvement over placebo. The mean change on disability weight associated with 1 SD change in clinical improvement for schizophrenia was 0.181.