[An Experience Report on the Evaluation of New Forms of Care for People with Mental Illness: Pros and Cons of the Use of SHI Claims Data].

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Gesundheitswesen Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-02 DOI:10.1055/a-2297-5347
Anne Neumann, Roman Kliemt, Fabian Baum, Martin Seifert, Denise Kubat, Stefanie March, Ines Weinhold, Enno Swart, Jochen Schmitt
{"title":"[An Experience Report on the Evaluation of New Forms of Care for People with Mental Illness: Pros and Cons of the Use of SHI Claims Data].","authors":"Anne Neumann, Roman Kliemt, Fabian Baum, Martin Seifert, Denise Kubat, Stefanie March, Ines Weinhold, Enno Swart, Jochen Schmitt","doi":"10.1055/a-2297-5347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The present article describes the special features of an evaluation of research in mental health services in Germany. The experiences of the evaluation of flexible and integrated treatment options with a global treatment budget in psychiatric hospitals based on routine data of more than 70 statutory health insurance (SHI) funds (EVA64 study) are systematically presented. Using the EVA64 study as an example, recommendations for the use of claims data in the field of mental health services research and in general are derived. (1) First, the study and its use of claims data is described and classified. (2) The individual outcomes of the study are presented and evaluated in order to (3) derive criteria, identify strengths and suggest potential uses of claims data. (4) Finally, recommendations for the further development of claims data from SHI funds as a basis for evaluation are described.</p>","PeriodicalId":47653,"journal":{"name":"Gesundheitswesen","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gesundheitswesen","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2297-5347","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present article describes the special features of an evaluation of research in mental health services in Germany. The experiences of the evaluation of flexible and integrated treatment options with a global treatment budget in psychiatric hospitals based on routine data of more than 70 statutory health insurance (SHI) funds (EVA64 study) are systematically presented. Using the EVA64 study as an example, recommendations for the use of claims data in the field of mental health services research and in general are derived. (1) First, the study and its use of claims data is described and classified. (2) The individual outcomes of the study are presented and evaluated in order to (3) derive criteria, identify strengths and suggest potential uses of claims data. (4) Finally, recommendations for the further development of claims data from SHI funds as a basis for evaluation are described.

评估为精神病患者提供护理的新形式:使用社会保险局常规数据的利弊--一份实地报告。
本文介绍了德国精神卫生服务研究评估的特点。文章系统地介绍了基于 70 多家法定医疗保险基金(SHI)的常规数据,对精神病医院灵活的综合治疗方案和总体治疗预算进行评估的经验(EVA64 研究)。以 EVA64 研究为例,提出了在精神卫生服务研究领域和一般情况下使用报销数据的建议。(1) 首先,对该研究及其报销单数据的使用进行了描述和分类。(2) 介绍并评估研究的各项成果,以便 (3) 制定标准,确定优势,并就报销单数据的潜在用途提出建议。(4) 最后,介绍进一步开发作为评估基础的社会保险基金报销数据的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Gesundheitswesen
Gesundheitswesen PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
18.20%
发文量
308
期刊介绍: The health service informs you comprehensively and up-to-date about the most important topics of the health care system. In addition to guidelines, overviews and comments, you will find current research results and contributions to CME-certified continuing education and training. The journal offers a scientific discussion forum and a platform for communications from professional societies. The content quality is ensured by a publisher body, the expert advisory board and other experts in the peer review process.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信