Cited by 73Mental Health Treatment and AccessTreatment of Major DepressionAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Treatment Initiation for New Episodes of Depression in Primary Care Settings

Open access
Waitzfelder, Beth, Stewart, Christine, Coleman, Karen J., Rossom, Rebecca, Ahmedani, Brian K., Beck, Arne, Zeber, John E., Daida, Yihe G. +3 more·2018·Journal of General Internal Medicine

Abstract

Background Depression is prevalent and costly, but despite effective treatments, is often untreated. Recent efforts to improve depression care have focused on primary care settings. Disparities in treatment initiation for depression have been reported, with fewer minority and older individuals starting treatment.Objective To describe patient characteristics associated with depression treatment initiation and treatment choice (antidepressant medications or psychotherapy) among patients newly diagnosed with depression in primary care settings.Design A retrospective observational design was used to analyze electronic health record data.Patients A total of 241,251 adults newly diagnosed with depression in primary care settings among five health care systems from 2010 to 2013.Main measures ICD-9 codes for depression, following a 365-day period with no depression diagnosis or treatment, were used to identify new depression episodes. Treatment initiation was defined as a completed psychotherapy visit or a filled prescription for antidepressant medication within 90 days of diagnosis. Depression severity was measured with Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) scores on the day of diagnosis.Key results Overall, 35.7% of patients with newly diagnosed depression initiated treatment. The odds of treatment initiation among Asians, non-Hispanic blacks, and Hispanics were at least 30% lower than among non-Hispanic whites, controlling for all other variables. The odds of patients aged ≥ 60 years starting treatment were half those of patients age 44 years and under. Treatment initiation increased with depression severity, but was only 53% among patients with a PHQ-9 score of ≥ 10. Among minority patients, psychotherapy was initiated significantly more often than medication.Conclusions Screening for depression in primary care is a positive step towards improving detection, treatment, and outcomes for depression. However, study results indicate that treatment initiation remains suboptimal, and disparities persist. A better understanding of patient factors, and particularly system-level factors, that influence treatment initiation is needed to inform efforts by heath care systems to improve depression treatment engagement and to reduce disparities.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11606-017-4297-2

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a study involving more than 50,000 individuals across 21 countries, the vast majority of those affected by depression did not seek treatment due to stigma or lack of knowledge of the disorder.

    “In a study involving more than 50 000 individuals across 21 countries, the vast majority of those affected by depression did not seek treatment due to stigma or lack of knowledge of the disorder.20”

    From Digital health technologies and major depressive disorder (2023) · cites this paper as [20]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Waitzfelder, B., Stewart, C., Coleman, K. J., Rossom, R., Ahmedani, B. K., Beck, A., Zeber, J. E., Daida, Y. G., Trinacty, C., Hubley, S., & Simon, G. E.
Affiliations
  • Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research (US)
  • Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute (US)
  • Kaiser Permanente (US)
  • HealthPartners (US)
  • Henry Ford Health (US)
  • Baylor Scott & White Medical Center - Temple (US)
Corresponding author
Waitzfelder, Beth
Venue
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Published
2018-02-08
Volume
33
Issue
8
Pages
1283-1291
ISSN
  • 0884-8734 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-1497
OpenAlex
W2787219475
Cited by
73
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
11.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of General Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Kaiser Permanente
  • National Institute of Mental Health (U19MH092201)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
depression, treatment initiation, primary care, antidepressants, psychotherapy, racial and ethnic disparities, older adults, depression severity, PHQ-9, newly diagnosed depression, health care disparities
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Antidepressive Agents, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Primary Health Care, Psychotherapy, Retrospective Studies, Delivery of Health Care, Integrated, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review