Mental health spending in Colombia: an analysis of rural and urban areas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mental health expenditures are increasing worldwide. In developed countries there is evidence that increased health spending is associated with improved outcomes. However, this information may not apply to the Colombian health system that is significantly different and underfunded in comparison with developed countries. METHODOLOGY: We used data from Colombia “Gestion de la Demanda” information system grouped for analysis by geographical areas, age groups, and ICD-10 sub-chapters for mental and behavioural disorders. We performed descriptive analytical techniques and Tufte’s statistical visualisations, with all monetary analysis presented in US Dollars (USD) adjusted for purchasing power parity (PPP). FINDINGS: We found that rural females with disorders of adult personality and behaviour in 2021 had the highest spending of 2,490 USD PPP. When analysing the averages, the highest values were found for males with mental and behavioural disorders related to psychoactive substance use between 12 and 26 years old with a mean spending of 1,074 USD PPP. Regarding the frequency of health services use per patient, the highest was 45 consultations per patient and was associated with the highest per capita health spending. INTERPRETATION: This study represents a pioneering effort in the analysis of mental health expenditure in Colombia to partition costs, providing a novel economic perspective about which areas in Colombia and for whom spend is greatest.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".