MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2386476230 · doi:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.01.1634

More Women are Medicated While More Men are Talked Out: Persistent Gender Disparities in Mental Health Care

2016· article· en· W2386476230 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
P. Joseph, Arminée Kazanjian

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReceiptMental healthMedicineIncentiveMedical prescriptionDepression (economics)PsychiatryHealth careSocioeconomic statusFamily medicineNursingEnvironmental healthPolitical sciencePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Physician incentives have been shown in previous studies to help reduce socioeconomic disparities in health care. Its impact on gender disparities, however, has rarely been investigated. Aim The impact of physician incentives on gender disparities in mental health care was investigated in this retrospective study. Method De-identified health administrative data from physician claims, hospital separations, vital statistics, prescription database, and insurance plan registries were linked and examined. Monthly cohorts of individuals with depression who were residing in British Columbia, Canada were identified and their use of mental health services tracked for 12 months following receipt of initial diagnosis. indicators that assess receipt of the following services were created: – counseling/psychotherapy (CP); – minimally adequate counseling/psychotherapy (MACP); – antidepressant therapy (AT); – minimally adequate antidepressant therapy (MAAT). interrupted time series analysis was used to estimate changes in these indicators before (01/2005–12/2007) and after (01/2008–12/2012) physician incentives were introduced. Results At the beginning of the study period, the percentage of individuals diagnosed with depression who received counseling/psychotherapy was higher, on average, among men (CP: 58.4%, MACP: 13.6%) than women (CP: 57.1%, MACP: 10.9%). in contrast, the percentage who received antidepressant therapy was higher among women (AT: 57.7%, MAAT: 47.4%) than men (AT: 53.6%, MAAT: 41.9%). Levels for these indicators have changed over time but the statistically significant differences between men and women were virtually the same before and after incentives were introduced. Conclusions Gender disparities in mental health care persist despite the introduction of physician incentives designed to enhance access to mental health services in primary care. Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207