Cited by 30Healthcare Policy and ManagementMental Health Treatment and AccessHealth, Medicine and Society

The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act Evaluation Study: Impact on Mental Health Financial Requirements among Commercial “Carve‐In” Plans

Open access
Friedman, Sarah A., Thalmayer, Amber G., Azocar, Francisca, Xu, Haiyong, Harwood, Jessica M., Ong, Michael K., Johnson, Laura Lambert, Ettner, Susan L.·2018·Health Services Research

Abstract

Objective: Did mental health cost‐sharing decrease following implementation of the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA)? Data Source: Specialty mental health copayments, coinsurance, and deductibles, 2008–2013, were obtained from benefits databases for “carve‐in” plans from a national commercial managed behavioral health organization. Study Design: Bivariate and regression‐adjusted analyses compare the probability of use and (conditional) level of cost‐sharing pre‐ and postparity. An interaction term is added to compare differential levels of pre‐ and postparity cost‐sharing changes for plans that were and were not already at parity pre‐MHPAEA. Findings: Controlling for employer/plan characteristics, MHPAEA is associated with higher intermediate care copayments ($15.9) but lower outpatient ($2.6) copayments among in‐network‐only plans. Among plans with in‐ and out‐of‐network benefits, MHPAEA is associated with lower inpatient ($23.2) and outpatient ($2.5) copayments, but increases in inpatient and intermediate in‐network and out‐of‐network coinsurance (about 1 percentage point). Among the few plans not at parity pre‐MHPAEA, changes in use and level of cost‐sharing associated with MHPAEA were more dramatic. Conclusion: Mixed evidence that MHPAEA led to more generous mental health benefits may stem from the finding that many plans were already at parity pre‐MHPAEA. Future policy focus in mental health may shift to slowing growth in cost‐sharing for all health services.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1475-6773.12614

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Friedman, S. A., Thalmayer, A. G., Azocar, F., Xu, H., Harwood, J. M., Ong, M. K., Johnson, L. L., & Ettner, S. L.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Optum (United States) (US)
  • Optum United Health Group San Francisco CA
Corresponding author
Friedman, Sarah A.
Venue
Health Services Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-12-12
Volume
53
Issue
1
Pages
366-388
ISSN
  • 0017-9124 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-6773
OpenAlex
W2561977787
Cited by
30
References
1
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2
FWCI
8.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health Services Research (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Funders
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (1R01DA032619‐01)
  • National Institutes of Health (TL1TR000121)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health, Medicine and Society
Keywords
Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act, mental health parity, commercial health insurance, coinsurance, deductibles, intermediate care, outpatient mental health services, health policy evaluation
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Deductibles and Coinsurance, Health Expenditures, Health Benefit Plans, Employee, Humans, Insurance, Psychiatric, Mental Health Services, United States, Insurance Coverage

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