Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Experiment Videos

Assessing state parity legislation*

Samuel H. Zuvekas1

  • 1Center for Cost and Financing Studies, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2101 E. Jefferson St.-Suite 500, Rockville, MD 20852, US, szuvekas@ahrq.gov

The Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics
|April 23, 2002
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Mental health parity: what are the gaps in coverage?

The journal of mental health policy and economics·2002
Same author

Income and employment among homeless people: the role of mental health, health and substance abuse.

The journal of mental health policy and economics·2002
See all related articles
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

The Sturm study

Area of Science:

  • Health Services Research
  • Mental Health Policy
  • Healthcare Economics

Background:

  • Parity mandates aim to equalize mental and physical health insurance coverage.
  • Previous research on the impact of these mandates has yielded mixed results.
  • Assessing the true effect of parity legislation requires robust statistical analysis.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically evaluate the Sturm study's conclusions regarding mental health parity mandates.
  • To identify limitations in the study's methodology and data that affect its findings.
  • To highlight the need for further research with adequate statistical power.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of the Sturm study's statistical power and sample composition.
  • Examination of outcome measures and their precision.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Consideration of the timing and scope of mandate implementation.

    • Main Results:

    • The Sturm study may lack sufficient statistical power to detect the effects of parity mandates.
    • Inclusion of diverse populations (uninsured, Medicaid, non-mandated private) and imprecise measures may obscure true impacts.
    • Methodological issues, including timing, complicate definitive conclusions.

    Conclusions:

    • It is premature to conclude parity mandates have no effect based on the Sturm study.
    • Further research using larger datasets and more precise measures is necessary.
    • Future studies should focus on adequately powered analyses to assess mandate effectiveness.