ReviewThe journal of mental health policy and economics2019
PERSPECTIVES: Insurance markets, labor markets, and the mental health services delivery system.
Review in The journal of mental health policy and economics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- PERSPECTIVE: A Path to Value-Based Insurance Design for Mental Health Services.The journal of mental health policy and economics · 2024Article
- PERSPECTIVE: Economic and Policy Research Interests Highlighted in the 25th NIMH-Sponsored Mental Health Services Research Conference.The journal of mental health policy and economics · 2023Review
- COMMENTS: Future Directions for OnTrackNY and Coordinated Specialty Care for Young People with Recent-Onset Psychosis.The journal of mental health policy and economics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe authors are health scientist administrators at the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). The mission of NIMH is "to transform the understanding and treatment of mental illnesses through basic and clinical research, paving the way for prevention, recovery, and cure." As part of its portfolio, NIMH supports research on mental health economics, and mental health services research.
methodIn this perspective article, the authors comment on two papers presented at the NIMH-sponsored Mental Health Services Research Conference in 2018 and subsequently published in the September 2019 issue of the Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics. Two important areas are highlighted in this review: (i) the impact of insurance and labor markets on the delivery of high-quality mental health services, and (ii) the need for advancements in method development and design in future studies. DISCUSSION: The complexity of health insurance markets created some unintended consequence of the mental health insurance parity legislation. Mental health provider shortages in local labor markets are a barrier to successful implementation and sustainment of innovative and evidence-based mental health service-delivery models for people with serious mental illness. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Data-capture techniques that seamlessly integrate insurance claims with clinical outcomes (e.g., from electronic health records) will better equip health economists and other end-users with rigorous research findings to inform public health policy and practice recommendations. Despite early signals of success, larger sample sizes and more rigorous research designs are needed to refine predictive models of functional outcomes of evidence-based service-delivery models (e.g., coordinated specialty care model including supported education, and supported employment) for people with first-episode psychosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32058978W3008342265What 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.