Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40190698›Full record

ArticleHealth affairs scholar2025

Medicaid managed care organizations' experiences with network adequacy.

Jane M Zhu, Ruth Rowland, Daniel Polsky, Inga Suneson, Simon F Haeder, Deborah J Cohen, K John McConnell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health affairs scholar, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Predicting pharmacy choice for managed care network design.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jane M ZhuDivision of General Internal Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4868-6078
Ruth RowlandCenter for Health Systems Effectiveness, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6015-4093
Daniel PolskyCarey School of Business, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21202, United States.
Inga SunesonCenter for Health Systems Effectiveness, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-0304-2680
Simon F HaederDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 88843, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0077-6047
Deborah J CohenDepartment of Family Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, United States.
K John McConnellCenter for Health Systems Effectiveness, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR 97239, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1280-3196

Funding

The Effects of Provider Networks on Medicaid Enrollees with Mental Health ConditionsR01MH133556 · NIMH · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI Jane Mingjia Zhu · 2024 to 2026
$2.1M
Mental Health Provider Networks in Medicaid and Implications for Care Utilization and Health OutcomesK08MH123624 · NIMH · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI ZHU, JANE MINGJIA · 2020 to 2023
$756k
NIMH NIH HHS K08 MH123624NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH133556
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Access to behavioral health care continues to be a challenge in Medicaid, where most enrollees are restricted to networks of providers and facilities contracted with managed care organizations (MCOs). While state and federal regulations have sought to ensure access to care, little is known about how health plans perceive and respond to these network adequacy standards. We interviewed 27 administrators and executives across 19 local, regional, and national Medicaid MCOs to assess their behavioral health networks and perceived barriers and facilitators in these efforts. We purposively sampled MCOs for maximum heterogeneity, with early findings used to refine subsequent recruitment targets until thematic saturation. We used an iterative inductive coding approach with code discrepancies analyzed and reconciled until consensus was reached. Five major themes arose: existing regulations often failed to capture true access gaps; MCOs used supplementary approaches to monitor network adequacy; limited corrective actions were available; access measures were more meaningful when grounded in enrollee experiences; and provider directory accuracy was challenged by logistical barriers. In this first study to examine MCOs' experiences with network adequacy monitoring, our findings suggest key deficiencies with current regulations and opportunities to support MCOs more broadly as policymakers seek to strengthen network adequacy regulations.

Indexed as

behavioral healthmanaged careMedicaidprovider networksworkforce

Identifiers

PMID40190698
PMCPMC11970020

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.