Literature DB >> 11497024

Comparing outcomes of routine care for depression: the dilemma of case-mix adjustment.

T L Kramer1, R B Evans, R Landes, M Mancino, B M Booth, G R Smith.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to formulate and test two case-mix models for depression treatment that permit comparisons of patient outcomes across diverse clinical settings. It assessed demographics; eight, diagnostic-specific, case-mix variables; and clinical status at baseline and follow-up for 187 patients. Regressions were performed to test two models for four dependent variables including depression severity and diagnosis. Individual treatment settings were then ranked based on a comparison of actual versus predicted outcomes using regression coefficients and predictor variables. A model inclusive of baseline physical health status and depression severity predicted depression severity, mental health, and physical health functioning at follow-up. A simpler model performed well in predicting depression remission. This study identifies variables to be included in case-mix adjustment models and demonstrates statistical methods to control for differences across settings when comparing depression outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11497024     DOI: 10.1007/bf02287245

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res        ISSN: 1094-3412            Impact factor:   1.505


  19 in total

1.  Changes in sickness at admission following the introduction of the prospective payment system.

Authors:  E B Keeler; K L Kahn; D Draper; M J Sherwood; L V Rubenstein; E J Reinisch; J Kosecoff; R H Brook
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1990-10-17       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R (SCID). I: History, rationale, and description.

Authors:  R L Spitzer; J B Williams; M Gibbon; M B First
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  1992-08

3.  The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection.

Authors:  J E Ware; C D Sherbourne
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 2.983

4.  Inappropriate use of bivariable analysis to screen risk factors for use in multivariable analysis.

Authors:  G W Sun; T L Shook; G L Kay
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Use of the Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale to predict service utilization and cost.

Authors:  K Hodges; M M Wong
Journal:  J Ment Health Adm       Date:  1997

6.  The family history method using diagnostic criteria. Reliability and validity.

Authors:  N C Andreasen; J Endicott; R L Spitzer; G Winokur
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  1977-10

7.  Psychiatric severity of illness. A case mix study.

Authors:  S D Horn; A F Chambers; P D Sharkey; R A Horn
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Measuring the outcomes of care for mental health problems. The case of depressive disorders.

Authors:  K Rost; G R Smith; M A Burnam; B J Burns
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  National Institute of Mental Health Diagnostic Interview Schedule. Its history, characteristics, and validity.

Authors:  L N Robins; J E Helzer; J Croughan; K S Ratcliff
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  1981-04

10.  Risk-adjusted outcome models for public mental health outpatient programs.

Authors:  M S Hendryx; D G Dyck; D Srebnik
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 3.402

View more
  6 in total

1.  Case-mix adjustment of adolescent mental health treatment outcomes.

Authors:  Susan D Phillips; Teresa L Kramer; Scott N Compton; Barbara J Burns; James M Robbins
Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res       Date:  2003 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.505

2.  Improving risk adjustment of self-reported mental health outcomes.

Authors:  Amy K Rosen; Sharmila Chatterjee; Mark E Glickman; Avron Spiro; Pradipta Seal; Susan V Eisen
Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res       Date:  2009-10-28       Impact factor: 1.505

3.  Investigating the relationship between costs and outcomes for English mental health providers: a bi-variate multi-level regression analysis.

Authors:  Valerie Moran; Rowena Jacobs
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2017-06-24

4.  Individual and neighborhood characteristics as predictors of depression symptom response.

Authors:  Vanessa Panaite; Nicholas W Bowersox; Kara Zivin; Dara Ganoczy; Hyungjin Myra Kim; Paul N Pfeiffer
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2019-03-04       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Standardization of health outcomes assessment for depression and anxiety: recommendations from the ICHOM Depression and Anxiety Working Group.

Authors:  Alexander Obbarius; Lisa van Maasakkers; Lee Baer; David M Clark; Anne G Crocker; Edwin de Beurs; Paul M G Emmelkamp; Toshi A Furukawa; Erik Hedman-Lagerlöf; Maria Kangas; Lucie Langford; Alain Lesage; Doris M Mwesigire; Sandra Nolte; Vikram Patel; Paul A Pilkonis; Harold A Pincus; Roberta A Reis; Graciela Rojas; Cathy Sherbourne; Dave Smithson; Caleb Stowell; Kelly Woolaway-Bickel; Matthias Rose
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-08-07       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Assessment of Outcome-Based Measures of Depression Care Quality in Veterans Health Administration Facilities.

Authors:  Paul N Pfeiffer; Kara Zivin; Avinash Hosanagar; Vanessa Panaite; Dara Ganoczy; H Myra Kim; Timothy Hofer; John D Piette
Journal:  J Behav Health Serv Res       Date:  2022-10-07       Impact factor: 1.475

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.