Prevalence of ADHD in Publicly Insured Adults

Abstract

In publicly insured adults, the prevalence of ADHD diagnosis and treatment increased dramatically over the years. Approximately half of the diagnosed patients are not treated, whereas half of the treated adults are not diagnosed.

A Place for Psychological Testing in the Assessment of Adult ADHD

“…Adults first diagnosed with ADHD after age 18 represent between 30% and 50% of the total number of adults with an ADHD diagnosis (Agnew- Blais et al, 2016;Caye et al, 2016a;Moffitt et al, 2015). Longitudinal and population studies suggest that the overall rates of adult ADHD are gradually increasing (Chung et al, 2019;Zhu et al, 2018). Current estimates show that rates of adult ADHD are beginning to approach the rates documented for children, reflective of the significant proportion of diagnoses not made until adulthood (Fayyad et al, 2017;Vitola et al, 2017).…”

Internal validation of Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) data capture for comprehensive managed care plan enrollees from 2007 to 2010

“…In an effort to better manage and monitor the Medicaid program and associated health care delivery system nationally, administrative claims files of individual states are compiled and transformed into a consistent and research‐friendly format, the Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) files . Medicaid Analytic eXtract files serve as a valuable resource to understand and address disparities in health and health care for these vulnerable populations and are used extensively to study the epidemiology and burden of diseases, health care delivery and policy, and their benefits, harms, and costs among Medicaid beneficiaries …”

“…As a result, most researchers have relied on the analysis of enrollees in traditional FFS and primary care case management plans in which reimbursement for providers is paid and thus recorded on an FFS basis . Given the significant increase in managed care penetration in Medicaid in recent years, this practice faces issues of depleted sample size and limited generalizability with more than half of the intended study population missing.…”

“…1 Medicaid Analytic eXtract files serve as a valuable resource to understand and address disparities in health and health care for these vulnerable populations and are used extensively to study the epidemiology and burden of diseases, health care delivery and policy, and their benefits, harms, and costs among Medicaid beneficiaries. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] To fully understand various aspects of health care for patients using administrative claims databases, service claims must be collected and reported completely and accurately. This is less of a problem for the fee-for-service (FFS) system in which state Medicaid agencies create billing records databases on the basis of the claims submitted directly by providers for reimbursement.…”

“…12,13 As a result, most researchers have relied on the analysis of enrollees in traditional FFS and primary care case management plans in which reimbursement for providers is paid and thus recorded on an FFS basis. 2,3,[6][7][8]10 Given the significant increase in managed care penetration in Medicaid in recent years, this practice faces issues of depleted sample size and limited generalizability with more than half of the intended study population missing. According to MAX chartbooks, 41.2% of full-benefit Medicaid enrollees are enrolled in capitated payment-based Health Maintenance Organization or Health Insuring Organization plans in 2004, which increased to 61.2% in 2012.…”