U.S. patent application number 14/218759 was filed with the patent office on 2014-08-21 for automated protocol for determining psychiatric disability.
This patent application is currently assigned to QTC MANAGEMENT, INC.. The applicant listed for this patent is QTC MANAGEMENT, INC.. Invention is credited to Lay K. KAY.
Application Number | 20140234818 14/218759 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 39464109 |
Filed Date | 2014-08-21 |
United States Patent
Application |
20140234818 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
KAY; Lay K. |
August 21, 2014 |
AUTOMATED PROTOCOL FOR DETERMINING PSYCHIATRIC DISABILITY
Abstract
A system for determining a psychiatric status of a person is
described, the system including an activity module that outputs
first data indicative of the person's activities of daily living, a
social module that outputs second data indicative of the person's
social functioning in a work-like setting, a persistence module
that outputs third data indicative of the person's concentration
persistence, a stress module that outputs fourth data indicative of
the person's ability to tolerate stress, and a processing module
that outputs fifth data indicative of a psychiatric disability
determination based on outputs from said activity module, said
social module, said persistence module, and said stress module. In
certain embodiments, at least one of the activity module, the
social module, the persistence module, and the stress module
comprises computer executable instructions. The system may also
feature a user interface configured to display the psychiatric
disability determination.
Inventors: |
KAY; Lay K.; (Pasadena,
CA) |
|
Applicant: |
Name |
City |
State |
Country |
Type |
QTC MANAGEMENT, INC. |
Diamond Bar |
CA |
US |
|
|
Assignee: |
QTC MANAGEMENT, INC.
Diamond Bar
CA
|
Family ID: |
39464109 |
Appl. No.: |
14/218759 |
Filed: |
March 18, 2014 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
11604358 |
Nov 27, 2006 |
8672843 |
|
|
14218759 |
|
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
434/236 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G09B 19/00 20130101;
G16H 50/20 20180101; A61B 5/165 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
434/236 |
International
Class: |
A61B 5/16 20060101
A61B005/16 |
Claims
1. (canceled)
2. A system for determining, using a computer, a psychiatric status
of a person, the system comprising: a non-transitory
computer-readable medium programmed to output, by a processor, data
indicative of a psychiatric disability determination, the
psychiatric disability determination (1) being based on first data
indicative of the person's activities of daily living, second data
indicative of the person's social functioning in a work-like
setting, third data indicative of the person's concentration
persistence, and fourth data indicative of the person's ability to
tolerate stress, and (2) comprising a degree of psychiatric
disability relative to each of the corresponding first data, second
data, third data, and fourth data; and a non-transitory
computer-readable medium programmed to determine, by a processor
and based on (i) the psychiatric disability determination, (ii) the
person's job, and (iii) the person's workplace, whether the person
can perform the person's job in the person's workplace.
3. The system of claim 2, wherein the first data is derived from at
least one of: a level of self-care, a level of personal hygiene,
communication ability, travel ability, and an amount of public
transportation use.
4. The system of claim 2, wherein the second data is derived from
at least one of: a communication capacity, an extent of cooperation
with others, a level of acceptance of authority, and a reliance
upon peer support.
5. The system of claim 2, wherein the third data is derived from at
least one of: an ability to remember multi-part instructions, a
level of persistence at a single task, a level of motivation, a
level of self-discipline, and a level of personal independence.
6. The system of claim 2, wherein the fourth data is derived from
at least one of: flexibility, a coping capacity, an ability to
adapt, and a degree of personal integration.
7. The system of claim 2, wherein the third data is derived from an
ability to remember multi-part instructions.
8. The system of claim 2, wherein the psychiatric disability
determination comprises a degree of psychiatric disability and a
degree of competence of the person performing the person's job in
the person's workplace.
9. A method for determining a psychiatric status of a person, the
method comprising: receiving, by a processor, first data indicative
of the person's activities of daily living; receiving, by a
processor, second data indicative of the person's social
functioning in a work-like setting; receiving, by a processor,
third data indicative of the person's concentration persistence;
receiving, by a processor, and fourth data indicative of the
person's ability to tolerate stress; processing, by a processor,
the first, second, third and fourth data so as to generate a
psychiatric disability determination, the psychiatric disability
determination comprising a degree of psychiatric disability
relative to each of the corresponding first data, second data,
third data, and fourth data; and determining, by a processor and
based on the psychiatric disability determination, the person's
job, and the person's workplace, whether the person can perform the
person's job in the person's workplace.
10. The method of claim 9, further comprising providing a
recommendation that the person return to his job or a
recommendation that the person not return to his job.
11. The method of claim 9, wherein the receiving comprises
receiving at least a portion of the first, second, third and/or
fourth data from a user.
12. The method of claim 9, wherein the receiving comprises
receiving at least a portion of the first, second, third and/or
fourth data from an electronic database.
13. The method of claim 9, wherein the receiving comprises
receiving numerical scores in response to one or more tests of the
person.
14. The method of claim 9, wherein the receiving comprises
receiving a response to one or more queries presented to the
person.
15. A system for determining, using a computer, a psychiatric
status of a person, the system.sup.i comprising: a processing
module programmed to output, by a processor, data indicative of a
psychiatric disability determination, the psychiatric disability
determination (1) being based on first data indicative of the
person's activities of daily living, second data indicative of the
person's social functioning in a work-like setting, third data
indicative of the person's concentration persistence, and fourth
data indicative of the person's ability to tolerate stress, and (2)
comprising a degree of psychiatric disability relative to each of
the corresponding first data, second data, third data, and fourth
data; and a recommendation module programmed (i) to determine, by a
processor and based on the psychiatric disability determination,
whether the person can perform the person's job in the person's
workplace; and (ii) to provide a recommendation that the person
return to his job or a recommendation that the person not return to
his job.
16. The system of claim 15, wherein the first data is derived from
at least one of: a level of self-care, a level of personal hygiene,
communication ability, travel ability, and an amount of public
transportation use.
17. The system of claim 15, wherein the second data is derived from
at least one of: a communication capacity, an extent of cooperation
with others, a level of acceptance of authority, and a reliance
upon peer support.
18. The system of claim 15, wherein the third data is derived from
at least one of: an ability to remember multi-part instructions, a
level of persistence at a single task, a level of motivation, a
level of self-discipline, and a level of personal independence.
19. The system of claim 15, wherein the fourth data is derived from
at least one of: flexibility, a coping capacity, an ability to
adapt, and a degree of personal integration.
20. The system of claim 15, wherein the third data is derived from
an ability to remember multi-part instructions.
21. The system of claim 15, wherein the psychiatric disability
determination comprises a degree of psychiatric disability and a
degree of competence of the person performing the person's job in
the person's workplace.
Description
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS
[0001] This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser.
No. 11/604,358, filed Nov. 27, 2006, the entirety of which is
hereby incorporated herein by reference.
BACKGROUND
[0002] 1. Field of the Invention
[0003] The present invention relates to methods and systems for
gathering and processing data to support rating decisions in the
adjudication of psychiatric disability requests.
[0004] 2. Description of the Related Art
[0005] In the field of disability evaluation there are numerous
approaches to assessment of basic or residual functioning. The
generally accepted method has been to utilize a large battery of
testing instruments to cover all aspects of the individual's
functioning that could impact normal life, especially job
performance. This testing material is often overlapping, redundant,
or unnecessary. Mental health factors such as mood disorders and
psychosis which affect the individual's functioning are evaluated
independently as part of a diagnostic assessment. For example, the
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory test ("MMPI"),
Draw-a-Person test ("DAP"), Rorschach test, and/or other tests as
well as an extensive clinical interview may be necessary to
classify a diagnosis according to the Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition ("DSM-IV"). However,
with such instruments, the issue of motivation, adaptive
capacities, or specific mental status questions dealing with memory
function, cognitive processing, abstraction, and other mental
functions are not specifically assessed or quantified in applicable
fashion to the question of work ability.
[0006] Additionally, job performance assessments similarly do not
answer these questions or those of diagnostic issues impacting work
performance. Specific mental status instruments concentrate on one
or another facet of mental functioning to the exclusion of
motivational and adaptive abilities. For example, many frequently
used tests of mental status focus primarily on cognitive abilities
to exclude the limitations of dementia. Some instruments focus on
specific conditions such as aphasia in brain injury as part of a
neuropyschological battery to determine degree or type of
impairment. They do not, however, focus on determining motivational
and adaptive abilities, which are of importance to determining a
disability evaluation especially as it relates to the
workplace.
SUMMARY
[0007] Thus, it would be advantageous to provide a useful and
reliable tool for determining the abilities and limitations that
individuals have in going about their activities of daily living.
Of special interest is how this information translates into
functioning in the workplace.
[0008] Certain forms of empirical evidence are widely accepted as a
necessary part of any evaluation for disability that relates to
work type activities. Those abilities found minimally necessary
include activities of daily living; social functioning;
concentration, persistence, and pace; and ability to tolerate
stress in work-like environments.
[0009] Another aspect of the disclosure provides for an enhanced
mental status examination. One embodiment encompasses and surpasses
a standard mental status examination as known in the art. Such
prior art mental status examinations have been used to identify
specific cognitive disorders such as dementias and traumatic brain
injuries, such as the Folstein Mini-Mental Status exam. These
standard mental status examinations stop short of accounting for
adaptive abilities, personality and social factors affecting
motivation, attempts at malingering, assessing cadence and
persistence, problem solving and judgment, and sample only a small
range of elements needed in a work setting.
[0010] In some embodiments, a system is disclosed for determining a
psychiatric status of a person. The system comprises an activity
module that outputs first data indicative of the person's
activities of daily living. The system also comprises a social
module that outputs second data indicative of the person's social
functioning in a work-like setting. The system also comprises a
persistence module that outputs third data indicative of the
person's concentration persistence. The system also comprises a
stress module that outputs fourth data indicative of the person's
ability to tolerate stress. The system also comprises a processing
module that outputs fifth data indicative of a psychiatric
disability determination based on outputs from said activity
module, said social module, said persistence module, and said
stress module.
[0011] In some embodiments of the system, the first data is derived
from at least one of a level of self-care, a level of personal
hygiene, communication ability, travel ability, and an amount of
public transportation use. In some embodiments of the system, the
second data is derived from at least one of a communication
capacity, an extent of cooperation with others, a level of
acceptance of authority, and a reliance upon peer support. In some
embodiments of the system, the third data is derived from at least
one of an ability to remember multi-part instructions, a level of
persistence at a single task, a level of motivation, a level of
self-discipline, and a level of personal independence. In some
embodiments, the fourth data is derived from at least one of
flexibility, a coping capacity, an ability to adapt, and a degree
of personal integration. In some embodiments of the system, at
least one of the activity module, the social module, the
persistence module, and the stress module comprises computer
executable instructions. In some embodiments of the system, the
system further comprises a user interface configured to display the
psychiatric disability determination.
[0012] In some embodiments, a method for determining a psychiatric
status of a person is disclosed. The method comprises receiving
first data indicative of the person's activities of daily living.
The method also comprises receiving second data indicative of the
person's social functioning in a work-like setting. The method also
comprises receiving third data indicative of the person's
concentration persistence. The method also comprises receiving
fourth data indicative of the person's ability to tolerate stress.
The method also comprises processing the first, second, third and
fourth data to generate a psychiatric disability determination. The
method also comprises outputting to an output device a data set
indicative of the psychiatric disability determination.
[0013] In some embodiments of the method, the psychiatric
disability determination comprises an employment determination. In
some embodiments of the method, receiving the first, second, third
and/or fourth data comprises receiving at least a portion of the
first, second, third and/or fourth data from a user. In some
embodiments of the method, receiving the first, second, third
and/or fourth data comprises receiving at least a portion of the
first, second, third and/or fourth data from an electronic
database. In some embodiments of the method, the receiving the
first, second, third and/or fourth data comprises receiving
numerical scores in response to one or more tests of the person. In
some embodiments of the method, the said receiving the first,
second, third and/or fourth data comprises receiving response to
one or more queries presented to the person. In some embodiments of
the method, the concentration persistence comprises a pace from a
first task to a second task.
[0014] In some embodiments, a computer executable program for
assisting determining a psychiatric status of a person is
disclosed. The computer executable program comprises a first module
configured to receive first data indicative of the person's
activities of daily living. The computer executable program also
comprises a second module configured to receive second data
indicative of the person's social functioning in a work-like
setting. The computer executable program also comprises a third
module configured to receive third data indicative of the person's
concentration persistence. The computer executable program also
comprises a fourth module configured to receive fourth data
indicative of the person's ability to tolerate stress. The computer
executable program also comprises a fifth module configured to
process said first, second, third and fourth data and configured to
output a psychiatric disability determination for later publication
to an output device.
[0015] In some embodiments of the computer executable program, the
first data is derived from at least one of: a level of self-care, a
level of personal hygiene, communication ability, travel ability,
and an amount of public transportation use. In some embodiments of
the computer executable program, the second data is derived from at
least one of: a communication capacity, an extent of cooperation
with others, a level of acceptance of authority, and a reliance
upon peer support. In some embodiments of the computer executable
program, the third data is derived from at least one of: an ability
to remember multi-part instructions, a level of persistence at a
single task, a level of motivation, a level of self-discipline, and
a level of personal independence. In some embodiments of the
computer executable program, the fourth data is derived from at
least one of: flexibility, a coping capacity, an ability to adapt,
and a degree of personal integration. In some embodiments of the
computer executable program, at least one of the activity module,
the social module, the persistence module, and the stress module
comprises computer executable software instructions.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0016] Having thus summarized the general nature of the disclosure
and some of its features and advantages, certain preferred
embodiments and modifications thereof will become apparent to those
skilled in the art from the detailed description herein having
reference to the figures that follow, of which:
[0017] FIG. 1 illustrates one embodiment of a system for
determining a psychiatric status of a person.
[0018] FIG. 2 is a list of sample queries presented to a person
whose psychiatric status is to be determined by certain embodiments
of the system.
[0019] FIG. 3 illustrates an example psychiatric disability
determination report.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS
[0020] Certain embodiments provide a reliable and valid instrument
to assess mental and emotional functioning as it impacts the
individual's ability to perform work-related activities. The
competencies measured include an individual's awareness of self in
relation to time, place and person ("orientation"), memory,
cognition, the conscious subjective aspect of feeling or emotion
("affect"), and motivation.
[0021] Each of the competencies is broken down into several aspects
of functioning. Basic orientation may include standard demographic
data, problem solving for access to transportation, and management
of finances and time. Memory functioning may include testing the
recollection of patterns and symbols, recollection of instructions,
physical and spatial memory, and covers auditory and visual areas.
Working memory is included to assess simple levels of multi-tasking
capacities. Concentration and attention span are also assessed in
this category as necessary for focused and sustained performance on
a task.
[0022] Cognition competency may include an assessment of an
individual's conceptual level. An individual's conceptual level may
range from concrete operations through the beginnings of formal
operations of logic to solve problems, make judgments, avoid
hazards to self and others, perform basic mathematical operations,
maintain a schedule, and draw conclusions based on deductive
processes.
[0023] Affect may be addressed in areas covering frustration
management and response to stress, impulsivity, and response to
depression and anxiety, both endogenous and exogenous. Affect may
also cover capacity for empathy and feelings of self-efficacy
(which is subsumed in the category of motivation issues as well).
Both affect and motivation need to be considered in the vital area
of ability to persist, take initiative, and complete tasks. The
ability to interact with co-workers, respond appropriately to
authority figures in taking directions, and make changes in routine
are part of such personality competencies that may be assessed.
Neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness
and conscientiousness, also known as the "Big Five," are also
assessed.
[0024] All competency areas are measured at a minimal to moderate
level to cover the lower functioning individual's ability ranges.
The individual's ability may range from the mildly mentally
challenged with good adaptive abilities to the borderline to low
average functional range with little or no adaptive abilities.
[0025] FIG. 1 illustrates a system for determining a psychiatric
status of a person 100. In the embodiment illustrated, the system
100 comprises an activity module 101 that outputs first data
indicative of the person's activities of daily living, a social
module 102 that outputs second data indicative of the person's
social functioning in a work like setting, a persistence module 103
that outputs third data indicative of the person's concentration
persistence, a stress module 104 that outputs fourth data
indicative of the person's ability to tolerate stress, and a
processing module 105 that outputs fifth data indicative of a
psychiatric disability determination based on outputs from said
activity module 101, said social module 102, said persistence
module 103, and said stress module 104. The system may use input
110 from queries related to psychiatric examination or from
psychiatric observation. Although five modules are shown in this
embodiment, other embodiments may include additional modules which
assist in determining the psychiatric status of a person.
[0026] In certain embodiments, the first data output by the
activity module 101 is derived from at least one of the follow
kinds of input: a level of self care, a level of personal hygiene,
communication ability, travel ability, and amount of public
transportation use. Other activities of daily living may also be
considered. In a preferred embodiment, responses to these
activities, which may include actions by the person, should reflect
persistent actions taken by that person and not an occasional
aberration from a habit. These inputs also preferably relate to
activities which affect a work place. For example, for the personal
hygiene input, if the individual is not able to maintain at least
average hygiene, he will probably not be hired for work or accepted
by his peers.
[0027] In certain embodiments, the second data output by the social
module 102 relates to social functioning. The data is derived from
social functioning as it applies to a work setting and may include
an individual's capacity to at least minimally communicate,
empathize and cooperate with others, interact in an accepting
manner with figures of authority, and rely upon peer support. For
example, some autistic individuals with impaired empathy for others
may nonetheless learn the basic rules of consideration for others
and appreciation of defined roles such as those between employer
and employee. On the other hand, if an individual cannot appreciate
the defined role differences between employer and employee, then
they may have a difficult time succeeding in a work-like
environment. Other activities related to social functioning other
than the ones listed above may also be considered.
[0028] In certain embodiments, the third data output by the
persistence module 103 is derived from at least one of the
following kinds of input: the ability to remember multi-part
instructions, level of persistence at a single task, level of
motivation, level of self-discipline, and level of personal
independence. The persistence module may also comprise a pace from
a first task to a second task. Concentration, persistence, cadence,
and other areas that define an individual's ability to remember and
carry out single and multi-step instructions are necessary to the
learning and implementation of any task. Consequently, these areas
are important functions for a work setting. Other persistence
related activities may also be considered. For example, if an
individual has difficulty remembering multi-part instructions
assigned as a function of that individual's job, then that
individual will probably not succeed in his job. In addition, these
persistence areas are easily measured at least in their concrete
aspects. Implementing and persisting at a task also touches on the
more difficult questions of motivation, self-discipline and
personal independence.
[0029] In certain embodiments, the fourth data output by the stress
module 104 is derived from at least one of the following kinds of
input: flexibility, coping capacity, ability to adapt, and degree
of personal integration. The ability to tolerate stress is also
fundamental to the ability to function in a work-like environment.
The concept of adaptation applies to this, as only individuals with
sufficient personality flexibility can sustain gainful activity in
the face of circumstances overwhelming the individual's coping
capacities. The skills to shift focus to new solutions, draw upon
peer support, communicate needs to administrative levels, and
utilize those other factors already mentioned, necessitate a degree
of personal integration that embodiments measure. Other activities
related to the ability to tolerate stress other than the ones
listed above may also be considered.
[0030] Each module 101, 102, 103, 104 and 105 may include one or
more sub-modules. For example, a "memory" sub-module for the stress
module 104 can include data about the ability of the individual to
remember instructions. Modules may share common sub-modules. For
example, the "memory" sub-module may be shared by multiple modules
because memory information may be needed for the analysis of
different components of a psychiatric disability status
determination.
[0031] In a preferred embodiment, the input 110 to the system
modules may consist of receiving a response to one or more queries
presented to the person, as illustrated in FIG. 2. In a preferred
embodiment, the queries are developed specifically for the system
in order to properly and accurately obtain the data each system
module requires to determine the psychiatric disability status of a
person. The queries may be developed with reference to psychiatric
texts, mental status exams ("MSE"), or with the input of qualified
healthcare professionals such as psychiatrists. Some well known
MSEs include the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory test,
Draw-a-Person test ("DAP"), and Rorschach test. A well known text
that may be used in creating queries is the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition
("DSM-IV").
[0032] In certain embodiments, every query that may be required by
the system for making a disability determination is identified by a
field identification number (FID). Examples of FID data fields
include a "patient name" field, a "blood pressure" field, a
"concentration exam score" field, and so forth. Each general
psychiatric evidence query is identified by a FID. A general
psychiatric evidence query corresponds to a psychiatric evidence
requirement specified by the system. In certain embodiments, a
claimant-specific psychiatric evidence query may be generated from
the general psychiatric evidence queries and based on the
claimant's alleged or actual psychiatric conditions.
[0033] In one embodiment, each FID includes a category code, a
rating code and a data query code, separated by the underline
symbol "_". For example, a FID can take the form of
"H047_SM500_T001". The category code "H047" identifies the FID to a
category of queries concerning social functioning. The rating code
"SM500" identifies the FID to a particular query for reliance upon
peer support. The data query code "T001" identifies the FID to the
data query "Do you like to be the center of attention at parties?."
A query text table stores the data query codes and the query text
for each of the data query codes. The table may also store a long
instruction text for each data query code as an instruction or
explanation. The stored query text and long instruction text can be
later displayed in a provider's exam protocol, history or interview
protocol, claimant questionnaire, clerk's data collection protocol,
psychiatric report or rating report.
[0034] A FID can take other forms. For example, in a relational
database arrangement, a rating code table can store the rating code
for each data query code, and a category code table can store the
category code for each data query code. Therefore a FID need only
include a data query code, and the rating code and category code
for the FID can be identified by referencing the rating code table
and the category code table. In an object-oriented arrangement, a
FID can be an object that includes a data query object field, a
rating code object field and a category code object field.
[0035] An FID mapping component may organize the rules collection
into a plurality of FIDs. For example, for a rating code that
identifies reliance upon peer support in an MSE, the component
creates a plurality of FIDs, with each FID identifying a unit of
psychiatric evidence required for making a rating decision on the
patient's reliance upon peer support.
[0036] The queries used for input 110 into the system modules may
be presented to the person in many different ways, including
orally, in writing, or in an electronic form. The queries may be
presented orally to the person by any number of individuals,
including but not limited to a physician, a physician's assistant,
a nurse, a secretary, or other health care professionals. In a
preferred embodiment, the person whose psychiatric disability
status is being determined is presented with a written
questionnaire, such as one shown in FIG. 2, on which he must record
his responses. In other embodiments, an individual such as a
healthcare professional may ask the person questions directly. The
person may respond to queries in many different ways, including
orally, in writing, and in an electronic form. The input 110 may
additionally consist of psychiatric observations. In a preferred
embodiment, the psychiatric observations are made by a qualified
health care professional, such as a psychiatrist. The medical
evidence collected in response to the queries is then stored into
the system.
[0037] In certain embodiments, the input 110 from the individual
may consist of numerical scores received in response to one or more
tests of the person whose psychiatric status is being determined,
such as for the MMPI. In certain embodiments, the input 110 may
consist of scales or reports which are provided by other tests.
[0038] Each of the activity, social, persistence and stress module
inputs may be received in whole or in part; consequently, a portion
of the input data 110 may be used in order to determine the data
output by the module. In certain embodiments, the input 110 may be
received by a user, such as a healthcare professional who evaluates
the individual's responses to the query and makes a psychiatric
disability status determination based on that individual's
responses. In other embodiments, an electronic system such as a
computer may receive the individual's responses and provide a
similar determination, albeit in electronic form.
[0039] In certain embodiments, the activity module 101, the social
module 102, the persistence module 103 and the stress module 104
comprise computer executable software instructions. In other
embodiments, the modules may be a combination of hardware and
software, an algorithm or steps therein, or any other process. In
certain embodiments, modules may run in parallel. In certain
embodiments, modules may run in sequence or in series. The system
100 may be implemented within executable software that runs on one
or more general purpose computers. It may, for example, run on
general purpose computers that are interconnected on a local area
network. Certain embodiments may be embodied within a web site, an
online database network, or any other type of multi-user system
that supports interactive entry of query responses. The system may
also comprise a user interface configured to collect medical
evidence and/or display the psychiatric disability determination.
The user interface may be accessible via computers and/or other
types of devices (PDAs, mobile telephones, etc.).
[0040] Referring back to FIG. 1, after medical evidence is
collected from the queries (and potentially psychiatric
observation) as input 110 and submitted to the activity module 101,
social module 102, persistence module 103, and stress module 104,
the output of those modules is then used by the processing module
105 to create a psychiatric disability determination. In certain
embodiments, intervening processing or other steps may occur before
the data is used by the processing module 105 to create a
psychiatric disability determination.
[0041] FIG. 3 illustrates an example psychiatric disability
determination report. In addition to information identifying the
patient 301, the report includes the estimated percentages of the
patient's psychiatric disability as it relates to each area of
determination. For example, the patient is estimated be 80% capable
of performing activities of daily living 302. The report also
includes an overall determination 303 of the patient's psychiatric
disability status, which in this case states that the patient would
only be 35% competent in comparison to others in the job market.
Furthermore, the patient is recommended not to return to his old
job.
[0042] In certain embodiments, the psychiatric disability
determination comprises an employment determination. The employment
determination may either be whether a person can competently return
to their previous job or whether a person can competently enter the
job market. In some embodiments, the employment determination may
be a twofold (e.g., "yes" or "no") output (ex. yes, a person can
return to his old job). In other embodiments, the employment
determination may be a percentage likelihood output (ex. a person
can enter the job market at 55% competency compared to the rest of
the market). In yet further embodiments, the employment
determination may include both a twofold output and a percentage
output. In a preferred embodiment, a twofold output is used to
determine whether or not a person can return to their previous job,
and a percentage output is used to assess how competent a person
may be should they choose to enter the job market.
[0043] The psychiatric disability determination report can be used
by disability claim benefit centers to determine compensation for
an individual related to his mental disability. Depending on the
insurance or disability program, reports of different formats can
be generated to conform to the commonly accepted format of the
particular program. For example, the medical evidence queries can
be grouped by difficulty of understanding on a report for a first
insurance program, and grouped by module on another report for a
second disability program.
[0044] The psychiatric disability determination report may be
output to an output device. The report may be output as a data set,
which includes data relevant to the disability determination
report. Outputting or publication of the report may include, but is
not limited to, printing, writing, displaying, storing,
transmitting, electronically sending, or manually sending the
report at any time after the report is generated. Output devices
may include but are not limited to, a display monitor, a printer,
paper, the human voice, computer memory, volatile (such as RAM) or
non-volatile (such as a hard disk drive), or an electronically
generated voice.
[0045] From the foregoing description, it will be appreciated that
a novel approach has been disclosed for the determination of the
psychiatric disability status of a person. While the components,
techniques and aspects of the disclosure have been described with a
certain degree of particularity, it is manifest that many changes
may be made in the specific designs, constructions and methodology
herein above described without departing from the spirit and scope
of this disclosure.
[0046] Various modifications and applications of the disclosure may
occur to those who are skilled in the art, without departing from
the true spirit or scope of the disclosure. It should be understood
that the disclosure is not limited to the embodiments set forth
herein for purposes of exemplification, but is to be defined only
by a fair reading of the appended claims, including the full range
of equivalency to which each element thereof is entitled.
* * * * *