The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association charged a workgroup with the task of revising the 1984 criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. The workgroup sought to ensure that the revised criteria would be flexible enough to be used by both general healthcare providers without access to neuropsychological testing, advanced imaging, and cerebrospinal fluid measures, and specialized investigators involved in research or in clinical trial studies who would have these tools available. We present criteria for all-cause dementia and for AD dementia. We retained the general framework of probable AD dementia from the 1984 criteria. On the basis of the past 27 years of experience, we made several changes in the clinical criteria for the diagnosis. We also retained the term possible AD dementia, but redefined it in a manner more focused than before. Biomarker evidence was also integrated into the diagnostic formulations for probable and possible AD dementia for use in research settings. The core clinical criteria for AD dementia will continue to be the cornerstone of the diagnosis in clinical practice, but biomarker evidence is expected to enhance the pathophysiological specificity of the diagnosis of AD dementia. Much work lies ahead for validating the biomarker diagnosis of AD dementia.

/pdf/the-diagnosis-of-dementia-due-to-alzheimer-s-disease-w5k0egjbz5.pdf

The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease: Recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease

Background Little is known about the general population prevalence or severity of DSM-IV mental disorders. Objective To estimate 12-month prevalence, severity, and comorbidity of DSM-IV anxiety, mood, impulse control, and substance disorders in the recently completed US National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Design and Setting Nationally representative face-to-face household survey conducted between February 2001 and April 2003 using a fully structured diagnostic interview, the World Health Organization World Mental Health Survey Initiative version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Participants Nine thousand two hundred eighty-two English-speaking respondents 18 years and older. Main Outcome Measures Twelve-month DSM-IV disorders. Results Twelve-month prevalence estimates were anxiety, 18.1%; mood, 9.5%; impulse control, 8.9%; substance, 3.8%; and any disorder, 26.2%. Of 12-month cases, 22.3% were classified as serious; 37.3%, moderate; and 40.4%, mild. Fifty-five percent carried only a single diagnosis; 22%, 2 diagnoses; and 23%, 3 or more diagnoses. Latent class analysis detected 7 multivariate disorder classes, including 3 highly comorbid classes representing 7% of the population. Conclusion Although mental disorders are widespread, serious cases are concentrated among a relatively small proportion of cases with high comorbidity.

/pdf/prevalence-severity-and-comorbidity-of-12-month-dsm-iv-54fahxwd1s.pdf

Prevalence, Severity, and Comorbidity of 12-Month DSM-IV Disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication

ContextUncertainties exist about prevalence and correlates of major depressive
disorder (MDD).ObjectiveTo present nationally representative data on prevalence and correlates
of MDD by Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,
Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria, and on study
patterns and correlates of treatment and treatment adequacy from the recently
completed National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R).DesignFace-to-face household survey conducted from February 2001 to December
2002.SettingThe 48 contiguous United States.ParticipantsHousehold residents ages 18 years or older (N = 9090) who responded
to the NCS-R survey.Main Outcome MeasuresPrevalence and correlates of MDD using the World Health Organization's
(WHO) Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), 12-month severity
with the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (QIDS-SR),
the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and the WHO disability assessment scale
(WHO-DAS). Clinical reinterviews used the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV.ResultsThe prevalence of CIDI MDD for lifetime was 16.2% (95% confidence interval
[CI], 15.1-17.3) (32.6-35.1 million US adults) and for 12-month was 6.6% (95%
CI, 5.9-7.3) (13.1-14.2 million US adults). Virtually all CIDI 12-month cases
were independently classified as clinically significant using the QIDS-SR,
with 10.4% mild, 38.6% moderate, 38.0% severe, and 12.9% very severe. Mean
episode duration was 16 weeks (95% CI, 15.1-17.3). Role impairment as measured
by SDS was substantial as indicated by 59.3% of 12-month cases with severe
or very severe role impairment. Most lifetime (72.1%) and 12-month (78.5%)
cases had comorbid CIDI/DSM-IV disorders, with MDD
only rarely primary. Although 51.6% (95% CI, 46.1-57.2) of 12-month cases
received health care treatment for MDD, treatment was adequate in only 41.9%
(95% CI, 35.9-47.9) of these cases, resulting in 21.7% (95% CI, 18.1-25.2)
of 12-month MDD being adequately treated. Sociodemographic correlates of treatment
were far less numerous than those of prevalence.ConclusionsMajor depressive disorder is a common disorder, widely distributed in
the population, and usually associated with substantial symptom severity and
role impairment. While the recent increase in treatment is encouraging, inadequate
treatment is a serious concern. Emphasis on screening and expansion of treatment
needs to be accompanied by a parallel emphasis on treatment quality improvement.

/pdf/the-epidemiology-of-major-depressive-disorder-results-from-2kfxdgis3p.pdf

The epidemiology of major depressive disorder: results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R).

Background. A 10-question screening scale of psychological distress and a six-question short-form scale embedded within the 10-question scale were developed for the redesigned US National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). Methods. Initial pilot questions were administered in a US national mail survey (N fl 1401). A reduced set of questions was subsequently administered in a US national telephone survey (N fl 1574). The 10-question and six-question scales, which we refer to as the K10 and K6, were constructed from the reduced set of questions based on Item Response Theory models. The scales were subsequently validated in a two-stage clinical reappraisal survey (N fl 1000 telephone screening interviews in the first stage followed by N fl 153 face-to-face clinical interviews in the second stage that oversampled first-stage respondents who screened positive for emotional problems) in a local convenience sample. The second-stage sample was administered the screening scales along with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID). The K6 was subsequently included in the 1997 (N fl 36116) and 1998 (N fl 32440) US National Health Interview Survey, while the K10 was included in the 1997 (N fl 10641) Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Well-Being. Results. Both the K10 and K6 have good precision in the 90th‐99th percentile range of the population distribution (standard errors of standardized scores in the range 0‐20‐0‐25) as well as consistent psychometric properties across major sociodemographic subsamples. The scales strongly discriminate between community cases and non-cases of DSM-IV}SCID disorders, with areas under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve of 0‐87‐0‐88 for disorders having Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scores of 0‐70 and 0‐95‐0‐96 for disorders having GAF scores of 0‐50. Conclusions. The brevity, strong psychometric properties, and ability to discriminate DSM-IV cases from non-cases make the K10 and K6 attractive for use in general-purpose health surveys. The scales are already being used in annual government health surveys in the US and Canada as well as in the WHO World Mental Health Surveys. Routine inclusion of either the K10 or K6 in clinical studies would create an important, and heretofore missing, crosswalk between community and clinical epidemiology.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/F141675CCD0E08C0FB98E01C006B4E0D/S0033291702006074a.pdf/div-class-title-short-screening-scales-to-monitor-population-prevalences-and-trends-in-non-specific-psychological-distress-div.pdf

Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress.

Offering a unifying theoretical perspective not readily available in any other text, this innovative guide to econometrics uses simple geometrical arguments to develop students' intuitive understanding of basic and advanced topics, emphasizing throughout the practical applications of modern theory and nonlinear techniques of estimation. One theme of the text is the use of artificial regressions for estimation, reference, and specification testing of nonlinear models, including diagnostic tests for parameter constancy, serial correlation, heteroscedasticity, and other types of mis-specification. Explaining how estimates can be obtained and tests can be carried out, the authors go beyond a mere algebraic description to one that can be easily translated into the commands of a standard econometric software package. Covering an unprecedented range of problems with a consistent emphasis on those that arise in applied work, this accessible and coherent guide to the most vital topics in econometrics today is indispensable for advanced students of econometrics and students of statistics interested in regression and related topics. It will also suit practising econometricians who want to update their skills. Flexibly designed to accommodate a variety of course levels, it offers both complete coverage of the basic material and separate chapters on areas of specialized interest.

Estimation and Inference in Econometrics

Objective: The study examined the financial performance of a managed behavioral health care organization responsible for mental health and substance abuse services under the Massachusetts Medicaid program. Financial performance is considered in light of incentives in the contract between the managed care firm and Medicaid. Methods: Data on the financial performance of the managed care organization were obtained from documents related to a recent rebidding of the contract and other publicly available documents. Financial incentives associated with claims costs and administrative services are also reported. Results: Spending by the managed care organization was about 25 percent lower than projected expenditures adjusted for inflation. Explicit financial incentives associated with cost reduction did not give the managed care organization strong inducements to attain these sayings. The profit and loss features based on cost targets were quite limited. The organization had a much greater incentive and opportunity to make profits by conserving its administrative costs rather than by controlling Medicaid claims costs. Conclusions: In light of the contract’s weak cost-saving incentives, it may be surprising that so much was saved. One explanation is that it was easy to achieve such savings in a state with high expenditures. However, in examining the particular amounts saved, it is clear that the organization came close to contract targets even when incentives to achieve them were weak. The authors label this behavior “managing to the contract” and discuss some reasons why a managed care organization might behave in this way and the implications this behavior has for contract design. (Psychiatric Services tracts. In these contracts, the managed behavioral health firm enjoys some profit or bears some loss depending on how costs compare with the negotiated target in the contract. In private insurance, carve-out firms have a disproportionately large representation in plans purchased by large employers. Umland (2) reported that 35 percent of employers with 5,000 or more employees had contracts with a managed behavioral health care vendor, whereas only 3 percent of fIrms with fewer than 500 employees did so. Fourteen state employee health plans have adopted managed behavioral health carve-out arrangements. State Medicaid programs have also been making use of the carve-out form oforganization for managing mental health and substance abuse care. By the end of 1995, a total of 12 states had adopted some form of managed behavioral health carve-out program for their

Savings from a Medicaid carve-out for mental health and substance abuse services in Massachusetts.

OBJECTIVE: The authors reviewed published research that compared partial and full hospitalization as alternative programs for the care of mentally ill adults, with the goal of both systematizing the knowledge base and providing directions for future research. METHOD: Studies published since 1950 were obtained through manual and electronic searches. Results were stratified by outcome domain, type of measure used to report between-group differences (global, partial, or rate-based), and time of assessment. Effect sizes were computed and combined within a random-effects framework. RESULTS: Eighteen investigations published between 1957 and 1997 were systematically reviewed. Over half of eligible patients were excluded a priori; diagnostic severity of enrollees varied widely. On measures of psychopathology, social functioning, family burden, and service utilization, the authors found no evidence of differential outcome in the selected patient population admitted to the studies reviewed. Rates of satisfaction w...

Partial Versus Full Hospitalization for Adults in Psychiatric Distress: A Systematic Review of the Published Literature (1957–1997)

We discuss the rationale for benefit carve-out contracts in general and for mental health and substance abuse in particular. We focus on the control of adverse selection as a principal explanation and find that this is consistent with the wide-spread use of sole-source contracting with periodic rebidding. We also find that some degree of risk sharing is common; we interpret this as a method of balancing cost-containment incentives with incentives to maintain access and quality on unmeasured dimensions.

Some Economics of Mental Health 'Carve-Outs'

Analyzing data on 2,225 men and 2,401 women from the National Comorbidity Survey, the authors examine the impact of psychiatric disorders on employment and, among those employed, work hours and income. They find that psychiatric disorders significantly ..

An Assessment of Measurement Error Bias for Estimating the Effect of Mental Distress on Income

Nonprofit organizations have a substantial share of the U.S. health care markets. They care for approximately 70 percent of all inpatient cases in acute care hospitals, and for half of the market for inpatient specialty mental health treatment and substances abuse treatment. Nonprofits are predominant in home health care, where visiting nurse associations typically serve more than half the market. Nonprofits are less dominant in the nursing home market but still account for nearly one-fourth of all days of care. In 1990, 54 percent of the enrollment in health maintenance organizations was in the nonprofit sector (Interstudy, 1991), although for-profit HMOs have been increasing their market share rapidly, from 26 percent in 1985 to 46 percent in 1990. As a crude overall measure, one can use expenditure data as an indicator of the importance of nonprofit organizations in the health sector. Data for 1989 shows $191.4 billion in revenues for health sector nonprofits (Independent Sector, 1993, p. 147, SIC code 80); this was 31.8 percent of total U.S. health spending for that year (Levit et al., 1991). Given the size and scope of the nonprofit sector, it perhaps inevitably inspires conflicting sentiments. Government appears to both promote and mistrust nonprofit organizations in the health sector. On the supportive side, not-for-profit providers are exempted from most federal, state and local taxes, and they receive preferential treatment in the contract procurement process in many states; for example, for-profit firms are precluded from bidding on requests to provide residential services to the mentally disabled in Maryland. On the negative side, legislation was recently introduced in the Congress to link

https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.8.4.129

Richard G. Frank

Papers

Savings from a Medicaid carve-out for mental health and substance abuse services in Massachusetts.

Partial Versus Full Hospitalization for Adults in Psychiatric Distress: A Systematic Review of the Published Literature (1957–1997)

Some Economics of Mental Health 'Carve-Outs'

An Assessment of Measurement Error Bias for Estimating the Effect of Mental Distress on Income

Nonprofit organizations in the health sector.