{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.036275695284159616, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013301088270858524, 'mean_word_length': 5.46875, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Clinical-based vs insurance-based recommendations for substance abuse treatment level.

An exploratory study of 250 patients was conducted at three treatment facilities in Western Pennsylvania, USA, to determine: 1) the extent of disagreement between clinical-based [using American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) criteria] and insurance-based [using Managed Care Organization (MCO) criteria] recommendations for treatment levels, and 2) the extend of ASAM recommendations that become the actual treatment. Cross-tabulations showed: 1) ASAM and MCO recommendations were the same for 85% of the cases, and 2) ASAM recommendations became the actual treatment in 93% of the cases. The exceptionally high level of ASAM-MCO agreement suggests a convergence in ASAM and MCO criteria and a deference to ASAM criteria in practice.