Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 402

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A new look at evidence about reduced cost of medical utilization following mental health treatment

Open access
·1984·American Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Meta-analysis of 58 controlled studies and analysis of the claims files for the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Federal Employees Plan for 1974-1978 provide mutually supporting evidence of the cost-offset effects of outpatient mental health treatment. These two complementary resources provide a powerful tool for investigating the nature of associations between mental health services and subsequent reductions in the use of other medical services. The authors found that the reductions in use of medical services are associated with inpatient rather than with outpatient utilization and tend to be larger for persons over 55 years of age.

Overview

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 · 10.1176/ajp.141.10.1145

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cited by

See all 402

Metadata

Venue
American Journal of Psychiatry
Published
1984-10-01
Volume
141
Issue
10
Pages
1145-1158
ISSN
  • 0002-953X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-7228
OpenAlex
W2032819372
Cited by
402
References
0
FWCI
26.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A new look at evidence about reduced cost of medical utilization following mental health treatment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1176/ajp.141.10.1145
The paper
A new look at evidence about reduced cost of medical utilization following mental health treatment. (1984). American Journal of Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.141.10.1145

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.