MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385396235 · doi:10.1007/s12325-023-02622-x

The Economic Burden of Adults with Major Depressive Disorder in the United States (2019)

2023· article· en· W4385396235 on OpenAlexaff
Paul E. Greenberg, A.S. Chitnis, Derek Louie, Ellison Suthoff, Shih‐Yin Chen, Jessica Maitland, Patrick Gagnon‐Sanschagrin, Andrée-Anne Fournier, Ronald C. Kessler

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Therapy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
FundersSage TherapeuticsBiogen
KeywordsMajor depressive disorderMedicinePresenteeismAbsenteeismEconomic costIndirect costsEconomic impact analysisPsychological interventionPsychiatryDemographyEnvironmental healthGerontologyPsychologyBusinessEconomicsMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Previous societal burden estimations for major depressive disorder (MDD) often fail to account for several hidden cost components. This study provides a comprehensive evaluation of societal costs for adults with MDD in the United States (USA) in 2019. The potential impact of a more effective, rapid-acting MDD therapy vs standard of care on the economic burden of MDD was estimated to illustrate the utility of such a framework in evaluating new interventions. METHODS: This study used a prevalence-based human capital approach. Incremental costs (2019 US dollars) per individual with MDD were derived from national survey inputs and published literature and included incremental healthcare costs and indirect costs. For each cost component, the societal costs were extrapolated by multiplying the per-patient costs by the number of individuals with MDD. The impact of a more effective, rapid-acting novel therapy on the economic burden of MDD was then simulated on the basis of these inputs. RESULTS: In 2019, the number of adults with MDD in the USA was estimated at 19.8 million (62.7% female; 32.9% severe MDD), and the incremental societal economic burden of MDD was estimated at $333.7 billion ($382.4 billion in 2023 US dollars), or $16,854 per adult with MDD. The primary cost drivers were healthcare costs ($127.3 billion; 38.1%), household-related costs ($80.1 billion; 24.0%), presenteeism ($43.3 billion; 13.0%), and absenteeism ($38.4 billion; 11.5%). In the simulated scenario, a hypothetical novel therapy with a 50.0% early response rate was associated with a 7.7% reduction in the economic burden of MDD relative to standard of care over 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The economic burden of MDD is substantial and extends beyond healthcare costs, underscoring the impact of MDD across multiple aspects of life. Such a broad societal perspective should be considered in assessing the impact of the advent of effective, rapid-acting MDD therapies.

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)0.003
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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.342 · 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

Citations194
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in TherapySame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207