Treatment Patterns Among Patients with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Comorbid Anxiety and/or Depression in the United States: A Retrospective Claims Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often have psychiatric comorbidities that may confound diagnosis and affect treatment outcomes and costs. The current study described treatment patterns and healthcare costs among patients with ADHD and comorbid anxiety and/or depression in the United States (USA). METHODS: Patients with ADHD initiating pharmacological treatments were identified from IBM MarketScan Data (2014-2018). The index date was the first observed ADHD treatment. Comorbidity profiles (anxiety and/or depression) were assessed during the 6-month baseline period. Treatment changes (discontinuation, switch, add-on, drop) were examined during the 12-month study period. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) of experiencing a treatment change were estimated. Adjusted annual healthcare costs were compared between patients with and without treatment changes. RESULTS: Among 172,010 patients with ADHD (children [aged 6-12] N = 49,756; adolescents [aged 13-17] N = 29,093; adults [aged 18 +] N = 93,161), the proportion of patients with anxiety and depression increased from childhood to adulthood (anxiety 11.0%, 17.7%, 23.0%; depression 3.4%, 15.7%, 19.0%; anxiety and/or depression 12.9%, 25.4%, 32.2%). Compared with patients without the comorbidity profile, those with the comorbidity profile experienced a significantly higher odds of a treatment change (ORs [children, adolescents, adults] 1.37, 1.19, 1.19 for those with anxiety; 1.37, 1.30, 1.29 for those with depression; and 1.39, 1.25, 1.21 for those with anxiety and/or depression). Excess costs associated with a treatment change were generally higher with more treatment changes. Among patients with three or more treatment changes, annual excess costs per child, adolescent, and adult were $2234, $6557, and $3891 for those with anxiety; $4595, $3966, and $4997 for those with depression; and $2733, $5082, and $3483 for those with anxiety and/or depression. CONCLUSIONS: Over 12 months, patients with ADHD and comorbid anxiety and/or depression were significantly more likely to experience a treatment change than those without these psychiatric comorbidities and incurred higher excess costs with additional treatment changes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".