MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406254600 · doi:10.1017/s1092852924001652

Mental Health-Related Healthcare Resource Use and Costs of Medicaid Beneficiaries with Treatment Resistant Depression Receiving Interventional Therapy

2024· article· en· W4406254600 on OpenAlexaff
Kristin K. Clemens, Maryia Zhdanava, Amanda Teeple, Arthur Voegel, Aditi Shah, Hannah E. Bowrey, Anabelle Tardif‐Samson, Dominic Pilon, Kruti Joshi

Bibliographic record

VenueCNS Spectrums · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicaidDepression (economics)Resource useMental healthMedicineHealth carePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Esketamine (ESK) nasal spray and interventional therapies including electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) are indicated for patients with treatment resistant depression (TRD). Little is known about healthcare resource use and associated costs of Medicaid beneficiaries, a population with a high burden of mental health disorders, initiating ESK, ECT or TMS. This study aimed to bridge this gap in knowledge. Methods Medicaid-insured adults with evidence of TRD (≥2 unique antidepressants of adequate dose and duration) were selected from Merative™ MarketScan® Multi-State Medicaid Database (01/2016-06/2022). Based on therapy initiated on or after 03/05/2019 (ESK approval date for TRD), patients were classified into three cohorts: ESK, ECT, and TMS. Before treatment initiation (index date), patients had ≥12 months of continuous insurance eligibility (baseline period). Mental health (MH)-related resource use and payer costs (USD 2022) were reported per-patient-per-month (PPPM) during the follow-up period, which spanned the index date until the earliest continuous insurance eligibility or data end. Results ESK cohort included 151 patients (mean age: 40.6 years; female: 70.2%), ECT cohort included 198 patients (mean age: 43.0 years; female: 60.6%), and TMS cohort included 140 patients (mean age: 39.5 years; female: 65.0%). During the follow-up period, the mean number of MH-related inpatient (IP) days trended lower in ESK cohort (0.09) relative to the ECT (3.72) and TMS (0.31) cohorts. Similarly, the mean number of MH-related emergency department (ED) visits trended lower in ESK cohort (0.07) relative to ECT (0.12) and TMS (0.26) cohorts. The mean number of MH-related outpatient (OP) visits in ESK cohort (4.83) trended higher than in ECT cohort (4.37) but lower than in TMS cohort (6.41). Mean MH-related acute care costs during the follow-up period trended lower in ESK cohort (IP: $76; ED: $29) relative to ECT (IP: $1,547; ED: $45) and TMS cohorts (IP: $238; ED: $123). Outpatient costs in ESK cohort ($1,632) exceeded OP costs in ECT ($1,023) and TMS ($1,051) cohorts. Conclusion In this descriptive analysis, a trend towards lower use and costs of acute MH-related care was observed after the initiation of ESK relative to the initiation of ECT and TMS. This finding should be interpreted with caution, given potential differences in patient profiles, clinical history and setting of administration. Funding Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. Analysis Group is a consulting company that has provided paid consulting services to Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, which funded the development and conduct of this study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCNS SpectrumsSame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207