ArticleThe American journal of managed care2025
ACA network regulatory filings are inaccurate, poorly match provider directories.
Article in The American journal of managed care, 2025. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAccess to mental health services has been shown to be particularly inadequate, with limited understanding of the efficacy of existing network adequacy regulations. State and federal regulations mandate insurance carriers to submit regulatory filings to help maintain network adequacy compliance, but the accuracy of these data remains unassessed. STUDY
designWe employed a secret shopper survey to verify regulatory filings and assess the congruence between the filings and provider directory listings as well as appointment availability and wait time for 8306 mental health counselors submitted by all carriers participating in Pennsylvania's Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace for plan year 2024.
methodsDescriptive analyses, with tests of proportion and t tests to assess differences between carriers and between adult and pediatric provider specialties.
resultsA total of 19.9% of filed regulatory listings (n = 1649) were not present in consumer-facing provider directories, and only 35.3% of filed listings (n = 2928) fully matched provider directory entries. Of the 2152 provider listings we were able to verify fully via secret shopper calls, 65.2% (n = 1404) exhibited at least 1 inaccuracy. Inaccurate phone number was the most common issue (56.6%; n = 1219). Appointments were available for only 321 of the 2152 providers (14.9%), with a mean of 33.2 days lapsed between call and scheduled appointment time. Although we identified substantial differences in appointment wait times by carrier, we found no difference between adult and pediatric providers.
conclusionsACA network adequacy assessments that rely on carrier regulatory filings and/or consumer-facing directories substantially overestimated provider availability and access to mental health services.
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.