| Title |
Treatment Outcome, Duration, and Costs: A Comparison of Performance Indicators Using Data from Eight Mental Health Care Providers in The Netherlands
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10488-017-0818-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
E. de Beurs, E. H. Warmerdam, S. C. C. Oudejans, M. Spits, P. Dingemanse, S. D. D. de Graaf, I. W. de Groot, H. Houben, W. G. E. Kuyck, E. O. Noorthoorn, M. A. Nugter, S. C. C. Robbers, G. E. van Son |
| Abstract |
Assessing performance of mental health services (MHS) providers merely by their outcomes is insufficient. Process factors, such as treatment cost or duration, should also be considered in a meaningful and thorough analysis of quality of care. The present study aims to examine various performance indicators based on treatment outcome and two process factors: duration and cost of treatment. Data of patients with depression or anxiety from eight Dutch MHS providers were used. Treatment outcome was operationalized as case mix corrected pre-to-posttreatment change scores and as reliable change (improved) and clinical significant change (recovered). Duration and cost were corrected for case mix differences as well. Three performance indicators were calculated and compared: outcome as such, duration per outcome, and cost per outcome. The results showed that performance indicators, which also take process variability into account, reveal larger differences between MHS providers than mere outcome. We recommend to use the three performance indicators in a complementary way. Average pre-to-posttreatment change allows for a simple and straightforward ranking of MHS providers. Duration per outcome informs patients on how MHS providers compare in how quickly symptomatic relief is achieved. Cost per outcome informs MHS providers on how they compare regarding the efficiency of their care. The substantial variation among MHS providers in outcome, treatment duration and cost calls for further exploration of its causes, dissemination of best practices, and continuous quality improvement. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 53 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 17 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 10 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 8% |
| Engineering | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 19 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 July 2017.
All research outputs
#16,069,695
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
#501
of 670 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,056
of 317,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
#9
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 670 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,553 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.