No synthesis was calculated. In the dynamic model (which takes account of the impact on disease progression), the group living alternative was the cheapest and yielded the greatest number of QALYs it was the preferred alternative.
This conclusion was unaffected by the various assumptions made in the sensitivity analysis but the magnitude of the difference between group living and the other alternatives did vary, particularly when GDS scores were mapped in the Rosser and Torrance matrices. Group living was much more attractive when using Rosser but only marginally more attractive using Torrance.