Cited by 73Mental Health Treatment and AccessPrimary Care and Health OutcomesHealth Policy Implementation Science

The Institute of Medicine “Chasm” report: implications for depression collaborative care models

Katon, Wayne J.·2003·General Hospital Psychiatry

Abstract

The Institute of Medicine report "Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health Care System for the 21st Century" describes the barriers in the American health care system to improving quality of care and outcomes of chronic illness. This article describes how depression collaborative care models as well as newer research aimed at organizational and economic issues have addressed these barriers in order to improve outcomes for patients with depression in primary care systems.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0163-8343(03)00064-1

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Depressed patients with a chronic medical illness have lower treatment adherence.

    “Depressed patients with a chronic medical illness are usually sicker than their counterparts37–46 and have lower treatment adherence.37,47–51”

    From Anxiety and Depression in COPD (2008) · cites this paper as [48]

  • Most Americans with chronic illnesses such as COPD, asthma, diabetes, or major depression are not receiving recommended care.

    “The Institute of Medicine “Chasm Report” has shown that most Americans with chronic illnesses such as COPD, asthma, diabetes, or major depression are not receiving recommended care.48”

    From Anxiety and Depression in COPD (2008) · cites this paper as [48]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 58 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Katon, W. J.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Katon, Wayne J.
Venue
General Hospital Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-07
Volume
25
Issue
4
Pages
222-229
ISSN
0163-8343 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2076031445
Cited by
73
References
58
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2012: 4
FWCI
9.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • General Hospital Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH041739, MH4-1739, MH01673)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
Crossing the Quality Chasm, depression, collaborative care, primary care, quality of care, chronic disease, organizational challenges, economic problems, patient outcomes
MeSH terms
Comprehensive Health Care, Cooperative Behavior, Depressive Disorder, Health Services Research, Humans, Mental Health Services, Primary Health Care, Quality of Health Care, United States, National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, U.S., Health and Medicine Division, Models, Organizational, Patient-Centered Care

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