Cited by 6Digital Mental Health InterventionsHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Quantifying the economic impact of a digital self-care behavioral health platform on Missouri Medicaid expenditures

Open access
Abhulimen, Sese, Hirsch, Abigail·2018·Journal of Medical Economics

Abstract

AIM: The primary objective of this study is to estimate the economic benefits relative to return on investment (ROI) of a state-wide initiative to integrate digital behavioral health (BH) self-care into the community BH system. METHODS: The observational study reviewed claims data of 799 people who registered with the digital tool (myStrength) and 715 matched control study participants. The control group was formed via coarsened exact match with blocking variables, including presence on the claims file, volume of health care utilization, participation in a medical health home, BH diagnosis and volume of psychotherapy claims. The primary study analysis of cost differences for the BH self-care tool group versus the control group were calculated by cost setting and the ROI of the BH self-care tool was estimated. Cost settings assessed include inpatient, emergency services, general and psychiatric outpatient, and outpatient psychotherapy. RESULTS: An incremental annual difference in difference reduction of $382 per user was observed over the 11 month study period in the self-care tool group. Sensitivity analysis indicated an ROI of between 142% and 695%. CONCLUSIONS: Augmenting BH offerings to include digital BH self-care tools appears to generate positive ROI via reduced total cost of care.

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 · 10.1080/13696998.2018.1510834

Cites

26 of 26 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

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Schladweiler K, Hirsch A, Jones E, et al. Real-World Outcomes Associated with a Digital Self-Care Behavioral Health Platform. Ann Clin Res Trials 2017;19(7):e271

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Abhulimen, S., & Hirsch, A.
Affiliations
  • Propensity4, Berwyn, PA, USA;
  • myStrength Inc., Denver, CO, USA
Corresponding author
Hirsch, Abigail
Venue
Journal of Medical Economics
Published
2018-08-31
Volume
21
Issue
11
Pages
1084-1090
ISSN
  • 1369-6998 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-837X
OpenAlex
W2885270340
Cited by
6
References
26
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
FWCI
0.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Economics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
behavioral health, Medicaid, return on investment, cost reduction, telemedicine, health care utilization, outpatient psychotherapy, outpatient psychiatric care, health homes
MeSH terms
Adult, Mental Disorders, Community Mental Health Services, Female, Humans, Male, Medicaid, Missouri, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Self Care, United States, Models, Econometric, Patient-Centered Care, Mobile Applications

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