ArticlePloS one2025
Mental healthcare expenditure among adults by type of mental healthcare and its association with age and sex in the Netherlands between 2015 and 2020.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Mental healthcare expenditure in the Netherlands by urbanicity and neighbourhood socioeconomic status and interactions with age over the period 2015-2020.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to explore temporal patterns of mental healthcare expenditure over the period 2015-2020 by age and type of mental healthcare, as well as by sex. A records-based cohort study using comprehensive data from health insurers in the Netherlands at the 4-number postal code level was performed. We used cluster-weighted linear regressions to examine temporal patterns of mental healthcare expenditure by age group (young: 18-34 vs old: 35-65), sex, and type of care. We examined the interaction of age with sex by adding the interaction between age, year, and sex to the model. The predicted costs were higher for ages 18-34 compared to older adults aged 35-64 for all mental healthcare costs except general practitioner mental healthcare (GP-MHC). The baseline regression coefficient for the young age group was 0.23 (95%-CI = 0.21;0.24) for all mental healthcare costs combined, 0.22 (95%-CI = 0.21;0.24) for specialized mental healthcare (SPECIALIST-MHC), 0.08 (95%-CI = 0.07;0.09) for basic mental health care (BASIC-MHC) and -0.02 (95%-CI = -0.03;-0.01) for GP-MHC. There was evidence for an interaction between age and year (p < 0.0001). Women had higher mental healthcare costs than men at all time points. We found an interaction between age, sex and year (p < 0.0001), with a stronger increase in the age-cost association SPECIALIST-MHC in women, while men showed a lower but more strongly increasing age-cost association for BASIC-MHC and GP-MHC. Our study found that while young women represent an increasing share of SPECIALIST-MHC, BASIC-MHC, and GP-MHC show a stronger rise in costs for young men. Future research should address whether this is due to an overlooked need for care among young men.
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.