ArticleJAMA psychiatry2019
Trends in Treatment and Spending for Patients Receiving Outpatient Treatment of Depression in the United States, 1998-2015.
Article in JAMA psychiatry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT05477420 (A Survey Study and Effect of Web-based Decision Aids on Preferences Shift), which is not on this map. Cited by 38 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Survey Study and Effect of Web-based Decision Aids on Preferences Shift
Who cites it
38 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 117 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness and safety of Arecae Semen compounds for patients with depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- The efficacy and safety of Zuranolone for treatment of depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Psychopharmacology · 2024Pooled it
- Depression Treatment Expenditures for Adults in the USA: a Systematic Review.Current psychiatry reports · 2019Pooled it
- Impact of a Digital Decision Aid When Choosing Between Face-to-Face and Guided Internet-Based Psychological Interventions for Depression Among Chinese-Speaking Participants in Hong Kong: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- Efficacy and Safety of Remote Ischemic Conditioning for Depression Insufficiently Responsive to Antidepressant: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2025Trial
- Cost-Effectiveness of Computer-Assisted Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression Among Adults in Primary Care.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Pharmacogenomics guided versus standard antidepressant treatment in a community pharmacy setting: A randomized controlled trial.Clinical and translational science · 2021Trial
- Mental Health Service use and Expenditures among Medicare Beneficiaries with Depression, Diabetes and Heart Disease after Cost-sharing Parity.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Primary Care Implementation of an Evidence-Based Protocol Addressing Women's Behavioral Health: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- US State Policy Contexts and Mental Health Among Working-Age Adults.The Milbank quarterly · 2026Article
- Trends and Disparities in Mental Health Use Among Asian American Sub-groups, 2013-2019.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Article
- Medicare Parity and Outpatient Mental Health Service Use and Costs Among Beneficiaries With Depression.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Gut microbiota as a novel target for treating anxiety and depression: from mechanisms to multimodal interventions.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Exploring the ElectroRetinoGraphy as a biomarker for predicting and monitoring therapeutic response to antidepressants in major depressive disorder: study protocol for the MESANTIDEP trial.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Service Attributes and Acceptability of Digital and Nondigital Depression Management Methods Among Individuals With Depressive Symptoms: Survey Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Commentary: Retinal electrophysiology in central nervous system disorders. A review of human and mouse studies.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- Missing in Action: Where Are the Patient-Centered, Telehealth-Ready Quality Measures for Common Mental Health Disorders?The Permanente journal · 2023Article
- No Improvement In Mental Health Treatment Or Patient-Reported Outcomes At Medicare ACOs For Depression And Anxiety Disorders.Health affairs (Project Hope) · 2023Article
- Development of a model to predict antidepressant treatment response for depression among Veterans.Psychological medicine · 2023Article
- Depressive Multimorbidity and Trajectories of Functional Status among Older Americans: Differences by Racial/Ethnic Group.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: After marked increases from 1987 to 1997, trends in depression treatment in the United States increased modestly from 1998 to 2007. However, multiple policy changes that expanded insurance coverage for mental health conditions may have shifted these trends again since 2007. Objective: To examine national trends in outpatient treatment of depression from 1998 to 2015, with particular focus on 2007 to 2015. Design, Setting, and Participants: This analysis of the use of health services and spending for treatment of depression in the United States assessed data from the 1998 (n = 22 953), 2007 (n = 29 370), and 2015 (n = 33 893) Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys (MEPSs). Participants included respondent households to the nationally representative survey. Data were analyzed from June 15 through December 18, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates of outpatient and pharmaceutical treatment of depression; counts of outpatient visits, psychotherapy visits, and prescriptions; and expenditures. Results: The analysis included 86 216 individuals from the 1998, 2007, and 2015 MEPSs. Respondents' mean (SD) age was 37.2 (22.7) years; 45 086 (52.3%) were female, 24 312 (28.2%) were Hispanic, 15 463 (17.9%) were black, and 62 926 (72.9%) were white. Rates of outpatient treatment of depression increased from 2.36 (95% CI, 2.12-2.61) per 100 population in 1998 to 3.47 (95% CI, 3.16-3.79) per 100 population in 2015. The proportion of respondents who were treated for depression using psychotherapy decreased from 53.7% (95% CI, 48.3%-59.1%) in 1998 to 43.2% (95% CI, 39.0%-47.4%) in 2007 and then increased to 50.4% (95% CI, 46.0%-54.9%) in 2015, whereas the proportion receiving pharmacotherapy remained steady at 81.9% (95% CI, 77.9%-85.9%) in 1998, 82.4% (95% CI, 79.3%-85.4%) in 2007, and 80.8% (95% CI, 77.9%-83.7%) in 2015. After adjusting for inflation using 2015 US dollars, prescription expenditures for these individuals decreased from $848 (95% CI, $713-$984) per year in 1998 to $603 (95% CI, $484-$722) per year in 2015, whereas the mean number of prescriptions decreased from 7.64 (95% CI, 6.61-8.67) in 1998 to 7.03 (95% CI, 6.51-7.56) in 2015. National expenditures for outpatient treatment of depression increased from $12 430 000 000 in 1997 to $15 554 000 000 in 2007 and then to $17 404 000 000 in 2015, consistent with a slowing growth in national outpatient expenditures for depression. The percentage of this spending that came from self-pay (uninsured) individuals decreased from 32% in 1998 to 29% in 2007 and then to 20% in 2015. This decrease was largely associated with increasing Medicaid coverage, because the percentage of this spending covered was 19% in 1998, 15% in 2007, and 36% in 2015. Conclusions and Relevance: Recent policy changes that increased insurance coverage for depression may be associated with reduced uninsured burden and with modest increases in the prevalence of and overall spending for outpatient treatment of depression. The lower-than-expected rate of treatment suggests that substantial barriers remain to individuals receiving treatment for their depression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.