Health Service Use among Individuals with Depression and Psychological Distress: A Population-Based Cohort Study in Ontario, Canada: Utilisation des services de santé par les personnes souffrant de dépression et de détresse psychologique : une étude de cohorte dans la population de l’Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Relatively little is known about how health-care utilization differs among individuals with psychological distress compared to those with major depressive disorder (MDD). Methods: Ontario participants of the Canadian Community Health Survey Cycle 1.2 (2002) were linked to health administrative data to follow their health-care utilization patterns for up to 15 years. Based on their survey responses, we classified individuals hierarchically into Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, criteria MDD, psychological distress (Kessler-6: 8 to 24), or an unexposed group with neither condition. We compared the rates of outpatient and acute care mental and nonmental health-related visits across the 3 groups over time using Poisson regression. Results: Among the 430 individuals with MDD, 668 with psychological distress, and 9,089 in the unexposed group, individuals with MDD and psychological distress had higher rates of health-care utilization than the unexposed overall and across time. The rates of psychiatrist visits for the MDD group were significantly higher than the other groups initially but declined over the follow-up. Conversely, the rates of psychiatrist visits among the psychological distress group increased over time and converged with that of the MDD group by the end of follow-up (rate ratio MDD vs. psychological distress at 1 year: 4.20 [1.97 to 11.40]; at 15 years: 1.53 [0.54 to 4.08]). Acute care visits were similar between the MDD and psychological distress groups at all time points. Conclusions: Individuals with psychological distress required mental health care rivalling that of individuals with MDD over time, suggesting that even a cross-sectional assessment of significant psychological distress is a serious clinical concern.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".