The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Out-of-Network Provider Use More Likely in Mental Health than General Health Care Among Privately Insured
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: Previous research has shown relatively high use of out-of-network mental health providers, although direct comparisons with rates among general health providers are not available. We aimed to (1) estimate the proportion of privately insured adults using an out-of-network mental health provider in the past 12 months; (2) compare rates of out-of-network mental health provider use with out-of-network general medical use; (3) determine reasons for out-of-network mental health care use. METHODS: A nationally representative sample of privately insured US adults was surveyed using the internet in February 2011. Screener questions identified if the participant had used either a general medical physician or a mental health professional within the past 12 months. Respondents using either type of out-of-network provider completed a 10-minute survey on details of their out-of-network care experiences. RESULTS: Eighteen percent of individuals who used a mental health provider reported at least 1 contact with an out-of-network mental health provider, compared to 6.8% who used a general health provider (P<0.01). The most common reasons for choosing an out-of-network mental health provider were the physician was recommended (26.1%), continuity with a previously known provider (23.7%), and the perceived skill of the provider (19.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Out-of-network provider use is more likely in mental health care than general health care. Most respondents chose an out-of-network mental health provider based on perceived provider quality or continuing care with a previously known provider rather than issues related to the availability of an in-network provider, convenient location, or appointment wait time.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
McGinty et al.'s focus on out-of-network care overlooks in-network care, which likely accounts for the majority of mental health and SUD treatment.
“Although this study highlights a notable effect of MHPAEA, its focus on out-of-network care overlooks in-network care, which likely accounts for the majority of MH and SUD treatment.”
From The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act evaluation study: Impact on specialty behavioral healthcare utilization and spending among enrollees with substance use disorders (2017) · cites this paper as Kyanko, Curry, & Busch, 2013
The Results report that about 18% of privately insured adults who used a mental health professional had any out-of-network contact, supporting the inference that most did not. The study does not establish the share of treatment delivered in-network or report a separate finding for substance use disorder treatment. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredAmong privately insured U.S. adults using mental health care, 82% used only in-network providers for their mental health care.
“For example, a recent study found that among privately insured U.S. adults using mental health care, 82% used only in-network providers for their mental health care (Kyanko, Curry, & Busch, 2013).”
From The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act evaluation study: Impact on specialty behavioral healthcare utilization and spending among enrollees with substance use disorders (2017) · cites this paper as Kyanko, Curry, & Busch, 2013
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Frank, 2000, Measuring adverse selection in managed health care., J Health Econ, 19, 829, 10.1016/S0167-6296(00)00059-X · DOI
- Cunningham, 2009, Beyond parity: primary care physicians perspectives on access to mental health care., Health Aff (Project Hope), 28, w490, 10.1377/hlthaff.28.3.w490 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
McGinty, E. E., Busch, S. H., Stuart, E. A., Huskamp, H. A., Gibson, T. B., Goldman, H. H., & Barry, C. L. (2015) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2014.1384 · Cited by 79
Self-citationFriedman, S., Xu, H., Harwood, J. M., Azocar, F., Hurley, B., & Ettner, S. L. (2017) · Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment · doi:10.1016/j.jsat.2017.06.006 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Kyanko, K. A., Curry, L. A., & Busch, S. H.
- Affiliations
- New York University (US)
- Yale University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kyanko, Kelly A.
- Venue
- Medical Care
- Published
- 2013-08
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 699-705
- ISSN
- 0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4707657
- OpenAlex
- W2325751852
- Cited by
- 32
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 1.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Medical Care (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH093414)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
- Keywords
- out-of-network care, mental health services, privately insured adults, health insurance networks, general medical care, service provider selection, continuity of care, health care utilization
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Female, Health Services, Humans, Insurance, Health, Male, Mental Health Services, Middle Aged, Sex Factors, Socioeconomic Factors, United States, Young Adult
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