ArticleOpen access journal of contraception2024
Review of Publicly Available State Reimbursement Policies for Removal and Reinsertion of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception.
Article in Open access journal of contraception, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: We examined reimbursement policies for the removal and reinsertion of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). Patients and Methods: We conducted a standardized, web-based review of publicly available state policies for language on reimbursement of LARC removal and reinsertion. We also summarized policy language on barriers to reimbursement for LARC removal and reinsertion. Results: Twenty-six (52%) of the 50 states had publicly available policies that addressed reimbursement for LARC removal. Of these 26 states, 14 (28%) included language on reimbursement for LARC reinsertion. Eleven (42%) of 26 states included language on additional requirements for reimbursement for removal and/or reinsertion: five state policies included language with other requirements for removal only, three policies included language with additional requirements for reinsertion only, and three included language with additional requirements for both. Three state policies specified no restrictions be placed on reimbursement for removal and one specified no restrictions be placed on reimbursement for reinsertion. Conclusion: Half of the states in the US do not have publicly available policies on reimbursement for the removal and reinsertion of LARC devices. Inclusion of unrestricted access to these services is important for contraceptive choice and reproductive autonomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.