↓ Skip to main content

A standardized stepwise drug treatment algorithm for depression reduces direct treatment costs in depressed inpatients ‐ Results from the German Algorithm Project (GAP3)

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Affective Disorders, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A standardized stepwise drug treatment algorithm for depression reduces direct treatment costs in depressed inpatients ‐ Results from the German Algorithm Project (GAP3)
Published in
Journal of Affective Disorders, November 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.jad.2017.11.051
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roland Ricken, Katja Wiethoff, Thomas Reinhold, Thomas J. Stamm, Thomas C. Baghai, Robert Fisher, Florian Seemüller, Peter Brieger, Joachim Cordes, Gerd Laux, Iris Hauth, Hans-Jürgen Möller, Andreas Heinz, Michael Bauer, Mazda Adli

Abstract

In a previous single center study we found that a standardized drug treatment algorithm (ALGO) was more cost effective than treatment as usual (TAU) for inpatients with major depression. This report aimed to determine whether this promising initial finding could be replicated in a multicenter study. Treatment costs were calculated for two time periods: the study period (from enrolment to exit from study) and time in hospital (from enrolment to hospital discharge) based on daily hospital charges. Cost per remitted patient during the study period was considered as primary outcome. 266 patients received ALGO and 84 received TAU. For the study period, ALGO costs were significantly lower than TAU (ALGO: 7 848 ± 6 065 €; TAU: 10 033 ± 7 696 €; p = 0.04). For time in hospital, costs were not different (ALGO: 14 734 ± 8 329 €; TAU: 14 244 ± 8 419 €; p = 0.617). Remission rates did not differ for the study period (ALGO: 57.9%, TAU: 50.0%; p=0.201). Remission rates were greater in ALGO (83.3%) than TAU (66.2%) for time in hospital (p = 0.002). Cost per remission was lower in ALGO (13 554 ± 10 476 €) than TAU (20 066 ± 15 391 €) for the study period (p < 0.001) and for time in hospital (ALGO: 17 582 ± 9 939 €; TAU: 21 516 ± 12 718 €; p = 0.036). Indirect costs were not assessed. Different dropout rates in TAU and ALGO complicated interpretation. Treatment algorithms enhance the cost effectiveness of the care of depressed inpatients, which replicates our prior results in an independent sample.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Master 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 20 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 21%
Psychology 8 15%
Neuroscience 3 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 20 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 16 February 2018.
All research outputs
#14,605,790
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Affective Disorders
#5,550
of 10,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,749
of 336,988 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Affective Disorders
#87
of 185 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,147 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 336,988 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 185 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.