Cited by 79Healthcare Policy and ManagementSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesOpioid Use Disorder Treatment

Federal parity law associated with increased probability of using out-of-network substance use disorder treatment services

Open access

Abstract

The Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 requires commercial insurers providing group coverage for substance use disorder services to offer benefits for those services at a level equal to those for medical or surgical benefits. Unlike previous parity policies instituted for federal employees and in individual states, the law extends parity to out-of-network services. We conducted an interrupted time-series analysis using insurance claims from large self-insured employers to evaluate whether federal parity was associated with changes in out-of-network treatment for 525,620 users of substance use disorder services. Federal parity was associated with an increased probability of using out-of-network services, an increased average number of out-of-network outpatient visits, and increased average total spending on out-of-network services among users of those services. Our findings were broadly consistent with the contention of federal parity proponents that extending parity to out-of-network services would broaden access to substance use disorder care obtained outside of plan networks.

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 · 10.1377/hlthaff.2014.1384

Cites

23 of 23 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

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?

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
McGinty, E. E., Busch, S. H., Stuart, E. A., Huskamp, H. A., Gibson, T. B., Goldman, H. H., & Barry, C. L.
Affiliations
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
Venue
Health Affairs
Published
2015-08
Volume
34
Issue
8
Pages
1331-1339
ISSN
  • 0278-2715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1544-5208
OpenAlex
W2218775139
Cited by
79
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 47 · 2016: 5
FWCI
45.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health Affairs (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH093414)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA026414)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
Keywords
mental health parity, addiction treatment, self-insured employers, treatment utilization
MeSH terms
Health Policy, Humans, Insurance Benefits, Insurance, Health, Mental Health Services, United States, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Insurance Coverage, Substance-Related Disorders, Healthcare Disparities

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