MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405433238 · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2024.12.048

Economic and clinical burden of major depressive disorder with insomnia symptoms in commercially and Medicaid-insured adults in the United States: A retrospective matched cohort study

2024· article· en· W4405433238 on OpenAlexaff
Hrishikesh Kale, Maryia Zhdanava, Dominic Pilon, John J. Sheehan, Tiina Drissen, Porpong Boonmak, Zia Choudhry, Aditi Shah, Manish K. Jha

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Affective Disorders · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicaidRetrospective cohort studyPsychiatryCohortMedicineMajor depressive disorderInsomniaDepression (economics)Cohort studyInternal medicineHealth carePolitical scienceEconomicsMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Insomnia is a common symptom of major depressive disorder (MDD). Presence of insomnia symptoms in MDD (MDDIS) has been associated with worse depression severity and outcomes. This study assessed the economic and clinical burden of MDDIS in the United States. METHODS: Commercially and Medicaid-insured adults from Merative® MarketScan® Databases (01/2016-06/2021) with ≥1 MDD diagnosis (index date) were included in the MDDIS cohort if they had ≥1 insomnia diagnosis within 12 month afterwards or in the other MDD cohort if they had no insomnia diagnoses/treatments; patients without MDD diagnoses/treatments (random index date) were included in the non-MDD cohort. Cohorts were propensity score-matched. Healthcare resource utilization (HRU), costs, and treatment patterns 12 months post-index were compared between MDDIS and each control cohort using linear and Poisson regressions. RESULTS: In both commercially (N = 52,280; mean age: 44 years; 67 % female) and Medicaid-insured (N = 15,653; mean age: 41 years; 73 % female) populations, the MDDIS cohort had significantly higher HRU and cost than the other MDD and non-MDD cohorts. Mean total all-cause healthcare cost difference between the MDDIS and other MDD cohort was $5842 (commercial) and $5152 (Medicaid); between the MDDIS and non-MDD cohort, it was $14,266 (commercial) and $11,314 (Medicaid). MDDIS compared to other MDD was associated with higher use of antidepressants, particularly agents with sedative effect. LIMITATIONS: Data were subject to incompleteness that might lead to measurement biases. CONCLUSIONS: MDDIS compared to other MDD and non-MDD was associated with significantly higher economic and clinical burden, highlighting the need for effective treatments for this population.

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)0.002
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Affective DisordersSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207