Latest news with #HealthForum


Time of India
2 days ago
- Health
- Time of India
Wharton psychologist and ex-Pentagon advisor unpacks the real mental health crisis among youth. Netizens ask, 'Are we sure it's just kids?'
When it comes to youth mental health and technology, it turns out the culprit isn't just how long kids are on their phones—but why they can't put them down. Adam Grant , organizational psychologist at Wharton and former advisor to the Pentagon, recently stirred up the internet with a stark observation about screen use and emotional wellbeing. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Grant wrote, 'The biggest risk to young people's mental health is not screentime. It's addictive behavior,' referencing a new study published in JAMA Health Forum titled Addictive Screen Use Trajectories and Suicidal Behaviors, Suicidal Ideation, and Mental Health in US Youths. The study tracked youth behavior over four years and delivered an unsettling insight: children who struggled to control their use of social media, games, or phones were more likely to show signs of mental distress, including suicidal thoughts and behaviors. — AdamMGrant (@AdamMGrant) The Red Flag Isn't Time; It's Compulsion Grant, whose work has shaped conversations on productivity, purpose, and emotional health, emphasized that it's not merely about counting screen hours. 'We should worry less about time than distress and compulsion,' he wrote. The study backs this up with numbers: around one-third of children showed increasing "addictive" use of phones and social media as they aged, with video games not far behind. These patterns weren't linked just to how long they were on devices—but to how much they felt unable to stop. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Shape your journey in the unforgiving desert world of Arrakis! Shop Now Undo Children with high or increasing compulsive use were found to be more than twice as likely to attempt self-harm than those with lower levels of screen dependency. Moreover, they experienced higher levels of anxiety, sadness, and anger—conditions that alarmingly persisted over time. Design or Disorder? A Heated Debate Online The study triggered intense reactions online, with many users echoing a recurring theme: this isn't just a youth issue. You Might Also Like: Wharton professor reveals the most underrated career skill, but research says it takes more than you to master it 'Would love to see this same lens applied to adult behavior,' one user commented. 'Feels like this is more like a global dilemma at this point.' Another chimed in: 'Screens are designed to be addictive. Isn't this like saying ultra-processed food isn't a risk—just the compulsive eating of it?' Indeed, many pointed fingers not only at behavior but also at big tech's intent—highlighting the built-in psychological hooks that keep users, regardless of age, scrolling long after they mean to stop. What This Means for the Future of Mental Health The JAMA study's findings go beyond parenting concerns—they shine a light on how addiction is being redefined in a digital world. It's not the hours on a device but the loss of control that signals a deeper emotional struggle. Grant, known for his work on languishing and emotional regulation, implies this is a teachable moment for both parents and policymakers. 'It boils down to emotional regulation,' a user reflected in response. 'Noticing, understanding, and managing the feeling that makes you do what you do is crucial.' You Might Also Like: Sundar Pichai met his IIT batchmate-turned monk who looked 'younger'. His reply: 'You deal with Google, I with God' A Global Crisis Disguised as a Youth Problem? While the study focuses on adolescents, many agree the findings reflect a broader epidemic. From compulsive doomscrolling to late-night binge-watching, adults are hardly immune. As one commenter noted, 'Are we sure it's just kids struggling with control?' — KevinHenrikson (@KevinHenrikson) In Grant's words, it's not time, it's torment. And it may be time we all look up from our screens—not just to monitor our kids, but to check in with ourselves.


Business Wire
5 days ago
- Health
- Business Wire
New Study Finds Senior Patients Managed by Women Physicians in a Value-Based Care (VBC) Model Have Equal or Better Clinical and Quality Outcomes and Less Healthcare Utilization
WESTERVILLE, Ohio--(BUSINESS WIRE)--agilon health (NYSE: AGL), the trusted partner empowering physicians to transform health care in our communities, today announced the publication of new peer-reviewed data examining the impact of gender differences of primary care physicians (PCPs) on patient outcomes, healthcare utilization and revenue using different Medicare payment models, specifically value-based care (VBC) and fee-for-service (FFS). Research was published in the May 16, 2025, issue of the JAMA Health Forum. In the study, researchers identified nearly 900 PCPs, of whom 40% were women, at 15 practice groups across seven states who deliver care through agilon's VBC model. Researchers then examined claims data from approximately 225,000 Medicare Advantage (MA) patients who were treated by these physicians, as well as the corresponding Stars quality data from national and regional payors. When comparing men and women PCPs in the same practice groups, researchers found that patients managed by women PCPs in a VBC model experience equal or better clinical and quality outcomes and less healthcare utilization, and the women physicians earned more per patient. 'The reversal of the gender gap under value-based payment implies that these models may be better aligned with desirable practice patterns that are more common in women, like spending more face-to-face time with patients in office visits,' said study author Ishani Ganguli, MD, MPH, Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. Specifically, researchers observed the following: Outcomes: Senior patients managed by women PCPs experienced better key clinical outcomes, as evidenced by better hemoglobin A1C control and receipt of more eye exams for those with diabetes, compared to patients seen by men PCPs. Of note, similar patient outcomes were observed for blood pressure control and adherence to statin medication for cholesterol management between the two groups. In terms of quality scores, women PCPs had higher composite Stars quality scores, but lower provider rating scores than their men counterparts. Utilization: While the number of primary care visits were similar between the two groups, visits to the emergency room (ER) and hospitalizations were substantially lower for patients seeing women PCPs compared to those seeing men PCPs. Revenue: Compared to men PCPs in their own practice groups, women PCPs earned more per patient in the VBC model and similar amounts under the FFS model. 'As a woman physician, I believe VBC allows us the opportunity to leverage the relationships we develop with our patients, which correlates to improved outcomes, and the ability to be paid because of those important connections,' said study author Victoria DiGennaro, DO, Pioneer Physicians Network, Akron, OH. 'Our partnership with agilon health and implementation of its VBC model have been instrumental in enabling both of those to happen.' agilon's VBC model, which puts the physician at the center, is known as the Total Care Model. The Total Care Model takes the same physicians, the same patients and the same payors, and moves them from the challenges of FFS into a total care relationship, which results in high-quality care and improved patient clinical and quality outcomes, lower healthcare costs and healthier communities. It encompasses long-term partnerships, a purpose-built platform and a Physician Network that helps physicians overcome obstacles and transition to VBC. 'In addition to agilon's Physician Network, another benefit of our partnership has been the focus on women physicians, which includes a Women Physician Leadership Council,' added Dr. DiGennaro. 'Many women physicians want to practice medicine as they were trained, while finding that critical work-life balance, and I'm proud to be a voice for them through my involvement on the Council.' Study design In this cross-sectional study, researchers examined PCPs with primary care specialties who participated in agilon's Total Care Model. A total of 872 PCPs (352 of whom were women) working in 15 practice groups in seven states (Ohio, Texas, New York, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, North Carolina and Michigan) were included, along with 223,810 MA patients. Women and men PCPs had similar education, years of experience and specialties. There are several limitations to the study. First, results may not generalize beyond physicians who participate in risk arrangements. Second, MA patients represent only a portion of doctors' patient panels. And, finally, researchers cannot observe how individual practice groups translated MA payments to take-home wages (though comparing PCPs within the same practice groups mitigates this concern). About agilon health agilon health is the trusted partner empowering physicians to transform health care in our communities. Through our partnerships and purpose-built platform, agilon is accelerating at scale how physician groups and health systems transition to a value-based Total Care Model for their senior patients. agilon provides the technology, people, capital, process and access to a peer network of 2,200+ primary care physicians that allow its physician partners to maintain their independence and focus on the total health of their most vulnerable patients. Together, agilon and its physician partners are creating the healthcare system we need – one built on the value of care, not the volume of fees. The result: healthier communities and empowered doctors. agilon is the trusted partner in 30 diverse communities and is here to help more of our nation's leading physician groups and health systems have a sustained, thriving future. For more information, visit and connect with us on LinkedIn.


Axios
10-03-2025
- Health
- Axios
COVID's legacy: Public health's diminished power
COVID-19 put public health officials on the front lines against a once-in-a-lifetime threat. It's left them with less power and resources to respond to future emergencies. Why it matters: Instead of strengthening America's public health infrastructure, the pandemic experience spawned hundreds of new laws in at least 24 states limiting public health orders or otherwise undercutting emergency responses. Republicans in Congress have also called for funding cuts to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Trump administration and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy are pivoting to chronic diseases, nutrition and nontraditional cures. What they're saying: Public health experts say it's all left the system weaker and less prepared for everyday threats — let alone the next big crisis. "Imagine if we just had a major fire ripping through our city, and our first instinct once we finally put the flames out is to basically get rid of all of our fire departments," said Jennifer Nuzzo, director of the Pandemic Center at Brown University School of Public Health. "That is essentially what we're seeing happen here." The big picture: The weakening of public health is evident at every level, from small rural counties up to the highest ranks of the federal government, experts say. The postponement of a key CDC vaccine advisory meeting, as well as the cancellation of a Food and Drug Administration advisory meeting to select the next strain of flu vaccine have only heightened anxiety. "We are seeing a systematic erosion of even those capacities that existed at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic," Nuzzo said. Zoom in: A federal pullback in preparedness leaves states even more on the hook to respond to crises, according to an analysis published last week in JAMA Health Forum. But legislatures in mostly conservative states have been taking aim at public health powers for the past few years. State lawmakers introduced 1,500 bills between 2021 and 2022 targeting public health authority, with nearly 200 becoming law, most of them curbing officials' power. Dozens of states restricted vaccine mandates, the ability to order business closures and masking rules. Others went further, banning stay-at-home orders, limiting emergency declarations, and blocking local governments from enacting stricter health measures than their state. More than 60 of these laws stretch beyond the pandemic period, taking powers off the table for future crises, an analysis in the BMJ found. Picture this: In February, Louisiana's surgeon general canceled the promotion of all mass vaccination campaigns in the state. Montana barred employers from requiring vaccinations while Ohio law bans the state health department from issuing quarantines unless a person has been diagnosed with a disease. Such controls could hamper the response if a pathogen like H5N1 bird flu becomes transmissible among humans. "The idea that you that you would completely eliminate flexibility to use tools like that without knowing what you're up against is bananas," said author and Stanford Law School professor Michelle Mello. Between the lines: Public health officials say some of the more recent DOGE-directed cuts to federal health agencies feel retaliatory for what critics see as a heavy-handed pandemic response. The intense criticism of the COVID response has left a lingering public distrust in health and diminished their influence. "I think people got really angry at the federal government for what they felt was an invasion of their rights, and thus was born an even greater sort of medical freedom movement," said Paul Offit, a member of the FDA's vaccine advisory committee since 2018. The effect of cuts isn't just less preparedness for emergencies, but the ability to provide services for infectious and communicable diseases, and air and water quality. Public health departments around the U.S. largely rely on federal funds for their budgets, and many are alarmed at the cuts that have already occurred or been threatened. Some are trying to prepay bills because they aren't sure they'll be able to cut checks in a month, Nuzzo said. "I'm hearing about health departments wondering if even some of our bread and butter public health programs like studying the high burden diseases in our communities ... if those systems are going to be able to function," Nuzzo said. The bottom line: COVID demonstrated in many ways what can go right when there's a strong public health infrastructure backed by government. The prime example is the development, testing, evaluation and distribution of a vaccine in record time, said Richard Besser, CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and former acting director of the CDC. "It was done without cutting any corners on safety, and resulted in saving millions of lives," Besser said. "The chances of us doing that again are zero."


Axios
03-03-2025
- Health
- Axios
High maternity costs hit Black and Hispanic patients hardest: study
Black and Hispanic people paid more in out-of-pocket costs for maternal care than Asian and white people with the same commercial insurance, a new study published in JAMA Health Forum found. Why it matters: Black mothers in the U.S. face a pregnancy-related death rate that is more than three times the rate for white mothers. About 80% of these deaths are preventable. The maternal mortality rate for Hispanic women is similar to that of white mothers but has surged in recent years. The cost burdens of maternity care may exacerbate those significant racial disparities, the researchers say. What they did: The study looked at pregnancy, delivery and postpartum care claims data from patients insured by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts from 2018 through 2022. Among nearly 77,000 unique enrollees who gave birth, almost 79% were white, roughly 10% were Asian, about 8% were Hispanic and about 4% were Black. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts undertook the research along with academics at the University of Maryland and Harvard to establish a baseline as they try to design solutions for more equitable care, co-author Mark Friedberg, senior vice president of performance measurement and improvement at Blue Cross, said in a news release. What they found: Black enrollees spent an average of $2,398 in total out-of-pocket spending for maternity care, between their deductible, copayments and coinsurance — or the amount an enrollee pays after they've hit their deductible. Hispanic enrollees paid $2,300, while Asian enrollees paid $2,202 and white enrollees $2,036, on average. Zoom in: Cost differences were especially pronounced for prenatal care, with Black enrollees paying 74% more than white people, the researchers found. Prenatal care is important to help avoid complications during birth. Levels of copayments were similar across all groups, and deductibles were slightly lower among Hispanic and white enrollees. But coinsurance payments differed significantly. Black enrollees paid an average of $772 for coinsurance and Hispanic enrollees paid an average of $779. Asian enrollees paid an average $669. White people paid an average of $511. The bottom line: Reducing coinsurance rates could make maternity care more accessible and, in turn, reduce maternal health disparities in the U.S., the researchers write.