↓ Skip to main content

Association of Depression Risk with Patient Experience, Healthcare Expenditure, and Health Resource Utilization Among Adults with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, September 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Association of Depression Risk with Patient Experience, Healthcare Expenditure, and Health Resource Utilization Among Adults with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, September 2019
DOI 10.1007/s11606-019-05325-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Victor Okunrintemi, Javier Valero-Elizondo, Erin D. Michos, Joseph A. Salami, Oluseye Ogunmoroti, Chukwuemeka Osondu, Martin Tibuakuu, Eve-Marie Benson, Timothy M. Pawlik, Michael J. Blaha, Khurram Nasir

Abstract

Approximately 20% of patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) suffer from depression. To compare healthcare expenditures and utilization, healthcare-related quality of life, and patient-centered outcomes among ASCVD patients, based on their risk for depression (among those without depression), and those with depression (vs. risk-stratified non-depressed). The 2004-2015 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) was used for this study. Adults ≥ 18 years with a diagnosis of ASCVD, ascertained by ICD-9 codes and/or self-reported data. Individuals with a diagnosis of depression were identified by ICD-9 code 311. Participants were stratified by depression risk, based on the Patient Health Questionnaire-2. A total of 19,840 participants were included, translating into 18.3 million US adults, of which 8.6% (≈ 1.3 million US adults) had a high risk for depression and 18% had a clinical diagnosis of depression. Among ASCVD patients without depression, those with a high risk (compared with low risk) had increased overall and out-of-pocket expenditures (marginal differences of $2880 and $287, respectively, both p < 0.001), higher odds for resource utilization, and worse patient experience and healthcare quality of life (HQoL). Furthermore, compared with individuals who had depression, participants at high risk also reported worse HQoL and had higher odds of poor perception of their health status (OR 1.83, 95% CI [1.50, 2.23]) and poor patient-provider communication (OR 1.29 [1.18, 1.42]). The sample population includes self-reported diagnosis of ASCVD; therefore, the risk of underestimation of the cohort size cannot be ruled out. Almost 1 in 10 individuals with ASCVD without diagnosis of depression is at high risk for it and has worse health outcomes compared with those who already have a diagnosis of depression. Early recognition and treatment of depression may increase healthcare efficiency, positive patient experience, and HQoL among this vulnerable population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 18%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Professor 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Other 8 21%
Unknown 10 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 31%
Social Sciences 4 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 12 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 08 April 2022.
All research outputs
#4,210,862
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#2,749
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,256
of 343,383 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#62
of 175 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
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 343,383 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 175 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 64% of its contemporaries.