ArticleBMJ open2026
Regional disparities in insurance-covered cognitive behavioural therapy in Japan: a nationwide cross-sectional study using National Database Open Data, 2015-2023.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesCognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is recommended as a first-line treatment for depression and anxiety disorders, but its utilisation under Japan's national health insurance remains poorly understood. This study aimed to describe CBT utilisation patterns, quantify regional disparities across prefectures and analyse temporal trends from fiscal year (FY)2015 to FY2023.
designThis was a nationwide repeated cross-sectional study.
settingJapan's National Database of Health Insurance Claims and Specific Health Checkups Open Data (NDB Open Data), FY2015-2023.
participantsAll patients who received insurance-covered CBT in FY2023, with a longitudinal comparison across FY2015-2023. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were annual CBT claims and patient counts. The secondary outcomes included prefecture-level distribution, population-adjusted utilisation rates per 100 000 population, distribution by sex and age, monthly trends and temporal changes over 9 years. Regional variation in physician-delivered CBT was assessed using the coefficient of variation (CV) and extremal quotient (EQ).
resultsIn FY2023, the total CBT claims numbered 38 045 with 8299 patients, representing only 0.14% of an estimated 6.03 million psychiatric patients. Physician-delivered CBT accounted for 99.6% (37 886 claims), whereas nurse-delivered CBT introduced in 2016 remained at 0.4% (159 claims). 13 of the 47 prefectures (27.7%) had zero or fewer than 10 claims. The population-adjusted physician-delivered CBT claims ranged from 370.96 per 100 000 in Okayama to 0.99 per 100 000 in Kumamoto, yielding an EQ of 375-fold. The CV among the 34 prefectures with measurable physician-delivered CBT was 174.8%. Despite indication expansions in 2016 and 2018, claims decreased by 9.9% from 42 216 in FY2015 to 38 045 in FY2023.
conclusionsInsurance-covered CBT in Japan remains severely underused, with significant regional disparities. Incremental policy measures, including indication expansions and nurse-delivered CBT, have failed to improve access. Fundamental system reforms, potentially including dedicated psychological therapy services, are needed to ensure equitable access to evidence-based psychological treatments.
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.