Cited by 51Healthcare Policy and ManagementHealth, Medicine and SocietyMental Health Treatment and Access

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

State Mental Health Parity Laws: Cause Or Consequence Of Differences In Use?: States that pass parity laws have fewer persons using mental health services to begin with—which may explain their propensity to legislate in this volatile area.

Abstract

A new wave of state and federal legislation affecting mental health insurance was passed during the 1990s. Although patient advocacy groups have hailed the passage of numerous parity laws, it is unclear whether this activity represents a major improvement in insurance benefits or significantly increases access to mental health care. We investigated this issue with data from two new national studies sponsored by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. We found that states with below-average utilization were more likely to enact state legislation, but utilization in those states continues to lag behind the rest of the nation.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1377/hlthaff.18.5.182

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. 1998, State Mental Illness Parity Laws
  2. Sturm R., 1998, Journal of Health Care Finance, 24, 84
  3. 1998, Health Care Plan Design and Cost Trends—1988 through 1997
  4. 10.1377/hlthaff.17.2.40 · DOI
  5. 10.1377/hlthaff.17.2.40 · DOI
  6. 10.1111/1468-0009.00147 · DOI
  7. Sloan F.A., 1998, Inquiry, 35, 280
  8. Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY), 1996, Congressional Record, H10965
  9. Sturm R., 1999, Inquiry, 36
  10. Kemper P., 1996, Inquiry, 33, 195
  11. 10.1001/archpsyc.1993.01820140007001 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Sturm, R., & Pacula, R. L.
Affiliations
RAND Corporation (US)
Venue
Health Affairs
Published
1999-09
Volume
18
Issue
5
Pages
182-192
ISSN
  • 0278-2715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1544-5208
OpenAlex
W2164871592
Cited by
51
References
12
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
15.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Health Affairs (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r29mh054147-05)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH54623, P50MH054623, MH54147)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health, Medicine and Society
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
mental health coverage, health care utilization, state legislation, access to mental health care, insurance coverage, health policy, patient advocacy
MeSH terms
Health Maintenance Organizations, Humans, Insurance Benefits, Mental Health Services, State Health Plans, United States, Utilization Review, Health Care Rationing

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