Access to urologic care for children in California: Medicaid versus private insurance
Abstract
Objectives To compare the access to urologic care for a child with cryptorchidism insured by Medi-Cal versus one insured by private insurance. Medi-Cal (California State Medicaid) is a joint state and federal health insurance program that plays a significant role in providing healthcare coverage to low-income children. Methods A total of 54 randomly chosen urology offices throughout California were surveyed by telephone to determine whether the office accepted pediatric patients, accepted Medi-Cal, and when the earliest appointment date would be for a patient with Medi-Cal versus one with private insurance. Results Of the 46 practices that accepted pediatric patients, 96% offered a new patient appointment to a child with private insurance, but only 41% were willing to offer an appointment to a child with Medi-Cal (P Conclusions Children insured by Medi-Cal have significantly less access to necessary urologic care compared with children with private insurance.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Subsequent audit studies did not sufficiently examine physicians' willingness to provide needed specialty care for publicly insured children.
“Subsequent studies in which this approach was used did not sufficiently examine physicians' willingness to provide needed specialty care for publicly insured children.7,13,21,22”
From Auditing Access to Specialty Care for Children with Public Insurance (2011) · cites this paper as [7]
Two previous audit studies of pediatric specialty care have shown even lower Medicaid acceptance rates: 4% and 8%.
“Two previous audit studies of pediatric specialty care have shown even lower Medicaid acceptance rates: 4% 13 and 8%.7”
From Auditing Access to Specialty Care for Children with Public Insurance (2011) · cites this paper as [7]
Two previous audit studies of pediatric specialty care had sampling weaknesses that may have biased their results.
“However, both studies investigated only one specialty type (orthopedics), and both had weaknesses in their sampling strategies that may have biased their results, including failure to exclude ineligible providers, 7 sampling at the physician level rather than the clinic level (i.e., possibly calling the same clinic multiple times), 7 and the exclusion of physicians practicing at tertiary pediatric”
From Auditing Access to Specialty Care for Children with Public Insurance (2011) · cites this paper as [7]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Auditing Access to Specialty Care for Children with Public Insurance
Bisgaier, J., & Rhodes, K. V. (2011) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa1013285 · Cited by 331 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hwang, A. H., Hwang, M. M., Xie, H.-W., Hardy, B. E., & Skaggs, D. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Southern California (US)
- ORCID
- Skaggs, David L.
- Venue
- Urology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2005-07
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 170-173
- ISSN
- 0090-4295 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1979493431
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 3.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Urology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Child and Adolescent Health
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Healthcare Systems and Reforms
- Keywords
- pediatric urology, cryptorchidism, Medicaid, Medi-Cal, private insurance, health insurance disparities, appointment availability, low-income children, California
- MeSH terms
- California, Child, Cryptorchidism, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Insurance, Health, Male, Medicaid, Urology, Private Sector
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
