MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392211288 · doi:10.2196/50192

Asynchronous Versus Synchronous Screening for Depression and Suicidality in a Primary Health Care System: Quality Improvement Study

2024· article· en· W4392211288 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amelia Sattler, Julia Dunn, Marleni Albarran, Charlotte Berger, Ana Calugar, John M. Carper, Lalitha Chirravuri, Nadine Jawad, Mira Zein, Mark P. McGovern

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDepression (economics)Patient Health QuestionnaireIntervention (counseling)Quality of life (healthcare)Health carePrimary carePsychiatryMedical emergencyFamily medicineDepressive symptomsNursingAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Despite being a debilitating, costly, and potentially life-threatening condition, depression is often underdiagnosed and undertreated. Previsit Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) may help primary care health systems identify symptoms of severe depression and prevent suicide through early intervention. Little is known about the impact of previsit web-based PHQ-9 on patient care and safety. Objective: We aimed to investigate differences among patient characteristics and provider clinical responses for patients who complete a web-based (asynchronous) versus in-clinic (synchronous) PHQ-9. Methods: This quality improvement study was conducted at 33 clinic sites across 2 health systems in Northern California from November 1, 2020, to May 31, 2021, and evaluated 1683 (0.9% of total PHQs completed) records of patients endorsing thoughts that they would be better off dead or of self-harm (question 9 in the PHQ-9) following the implementation of a depression screening program that included automated electronic previsit PHQ-9 distribution. Patient demographics and providers' clinical response (suicide risk assessment, triage nurse connection, medication management, electronic consultation with psychiatrist, and referral to social worker or psychiatrist) were compared for patients with asynchronous versus synchronous PHQ-9 completion. Results: Of the 1683 patients (female: n=1071, 63.7%; non-Hispanic: n=1293, 76.8%; White: n=831, 49.4%), Hispanic and Latino patients were 40% less likely to complete a PHQ-9 asynchronously (odds ratio [OR] 0.6, 95% CI 0.45-0.8; P<.001). Patients with Medicare insurance were 36% (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.51-0.79) less likely to complete a PHQ-9 asynchronously than patients with private insurance. Those with moderate to severe depression were 1.61 times more likely (95% CI 1.21-2.15; P=.001) to complete a PHQ-9 asynchronously than those with no or mild symptoms. Patients who completed a PHQ-9 asynchronously were twice as likely to complete a Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.89-3.06; P<.001) and 77% less likely to receive a referral to psychiatry (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.16-0.34; P<.001). Those who endorsed question 9 "more than half the days" (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.06-2.48) and "nearly every day" (OR 2.38, 95% CI 1.38-4.12) were more likely to receive a referral to psychiatry than those who endorsed question 9 "several days" (P=.002). Conclusions: Shifting depression screening from in-clinic to previsit led to a dramatic increase in PHQ-9 completion without sacrificing patient safety. Asynchronous PHQ-9 can decrease workload on frontline clinical team members, increase patient self-reporting, and elicit more intentional clinical responses from providers. Observed disparities will inform future improvement efforts.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.400 · 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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Mental HealthSame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207