ArticleBMC health services research2022
Comparison of depression care provided in general practice in Norway and the Netherlands: registry-based cohort study (The Norwegian GP-DEP study).
Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDepression is highly prevalent in general practice, and organisation of primary health care probably affects the provision of depression care. General practitioners (GPs) in Norway and the Netherlands fulfil comparable roles. However, primary care teams with a mental health nurse (MHN) supplementing the GP have been established in the Netherlands, but not yet in Norway. In order to explore how the organisation of primary mental care affects care delivery, we aimed to examine the provision of GP depression care across the two countries.
methodsRegistry-based cohort study comprising new depression episodes in patients aged ≥ 18 years, 2011-2015. The Norwegian sample was drawn from the entire population (national health registries); 297,409 episodes. A representative Dutch sample (Nivel Primary Care Database) was included; 27,362 episodes. Outcomes were follow-up consultation(s) with GP, with GP and/or MHN, and antidepressant prescriptions during 12 months from the start of the depression episode. Differences between countries were estimated using negative binomial and Cox regression models, adjusted for patient gender, age and comorbidity.
resultsPatients in the Netherlands compared to Norway were less likely to receive GP follow-up consultations, IRR (incidence rate ratio) = 0.73 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-0.74). Differences were greatest among patients aged 18-39 years (adj IRR = 0.64, 0.63-0.66) and 40-59 years (adj IRR = 0.71, 0.69-0.73). When comparing follow-up consultations in GP practices, including MHN consultations in the Netherlands, no cross-national differences were found (IRR = 1.00, 0.98-1.01). But in age-stratified analyses, Dutch patients 60 years and older were more likely to be followed up than their Norwegian counterparts (adj IRR = 1.21, 1.16-1.26). Patients in the Netherlands compared to Norway were more likely to receive antidepressant drugs, adj HR (hazard ratio) = 1.32 (1.30-1.34).
conclusionsThe observed differences indicate that the organisation of primary mental health care affects the provision of follow-up consultations in Norway and the Netherlands. Clinical studies are needed to explore the impact of team-based care and GP-based care on the quality of depression care and patient outcomes.
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.