Literature DB >> 22167581

Utilization of infertility treatments: the effects of insurance mandates.

Marianne P Bitler1, Lucie Schmidt.   

Abstract

Over the last several decades, both delay of childbearing and fertility problems have become increasingly common among women in developed countries. At the same time, technological changes have made many more options available to individuals experiencing fertility problems. However, these technologies are expensive, and only 25% of health insurance plans in the United States cover infertility treatment. As a result of these high costs, legislation has been passed in 15 states that mandates insurance coverage of infertility treatment in private insurance plans. In this article, we examine whether mandated insurance coverage for infertility treatment affects utilization. We allow utilization effects to differ by age and education, since previous research suggests that older, more-educated women should be more likely to be directly affected by the mandates than younger women and less-educated women, both because they are at higher risk of fertility problems and because they are more likely to have private health insurance, which is subject to the mandate. We find robust evidence that the mandates do have a significant effect on utilization for older, more-educated women that is larger than the effects found for other groups. These effects are largest for the use of ovulation-inducing drugs and artificial insemination.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22167581      PMCID: PMC5833298          DOI: 10.1007/s13524-011-0078-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Demography        ISSN: 0070-3370


  28 in total

Review 1.  Cost-effectiveness of in vitro fertilization.

Authors:  J Collins
Journal:  Semin Reprod Med       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 1.303

2.  Self-insurance in times of growing and retreating managed care.

Authors:  Jon R Gabel; Gail A Jensen; Samantha Hawkins
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2003 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 6.301

3.  Insurance coverage and outcomes of in vitro fertilization.

Authors:  Tarun Jain; Bernard L Harlow; Mark D Hornstein
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-08-29       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Fertility timing, wages, and human capital.

Authors:  M L Blackburn; D E Bloom; D Neumark
Journal:  J Popul Econ       Date:  1993-02

5.  Age and fertility: how late can you wait?

Authors:  J Menken
Journal:  Demography       Date:  1985-11

6.  The effect of Medicaid eligibility expansions on fertility.

Authors:  Madeline Zavodny; Marianne P Bitler
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2010-06-17       Impact factor: 4.634

7.  Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2004: results generated from European registers by ESHRE.

Authors:  A Nyboe Andersen; V Goossens; A P Ferraretti; S Bhattacharya; R Felberbaum; J de Mouzon; K G Nygren
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2008-02-14       Impact factor: 6.918

8.  Do markets respond to quality information? The case of fertility clinics.

Authors:  M Kate Bundorf; Natalie Chun; Gopi Shah Goda; Daniel P Kessler
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2009-01-29       Impact factor: 3.883

9.  Assisted reproductive technology surveillance - United States, 2004.

Authors:  Victoria Clay Wright; Jeani Chang; Gary Jeng; Michael Chen; Maurizio Macaluso
Journal:  MMWR Surveill Summ       Date:  2007-06-08

10.  Assisted reproductive technology surveillance--United States, 2000.

Authors:  Victoria C Wright; Laura A Schieve; Meredith A Reynolds; Gary Jeng
Journal:  MMWR Surveill Summ       Date:  2003-08-29
View more
  26 in total

1.  Contraception Use, Abortions, and Births: The Effect of Insurance Mandates.

Authors:  Karen Mulligan
Journal:  Demography       Date:  2015-08

2.  Responding to Infertility: Lessons From a Growing Body of Research and Suggested Guidelines for Practice.

Authors:  Karina M Shreffler; Arthur L Greil; Julia McQuillan
Journal:  Fam Relat       Date:  2017-10

3.  Effects of State Cervical Cancer Insurance Mandates on Pap Test Rates.

Authors:  Marianne P Bitler; Christopher S Carpenter
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2016-03-15       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Health Insurance Mandates, Mammography, and Breast Cancer Diagnoses.

Authors:  Marianne P Bitler; Christopher S Carpenter
Journal:  Am Econ J Econ Policy       Date:  2016-08

5.  Socioeconomic status and genetic influences on cognitive development.

Authors:  David N Figlio; Jeremy Freese; Krzysztof Karbownik; Jeffrey Roth
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-11-13       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Racial Disparities in Fertility Care: an Analysis of 4537 Intrauterine Insemination Cycles.

Authors:  Irene Dimitriadis; Maria Batsis; John C Petrozza; Irene Souter
Journal:  J Racial Ethn Health Disparities       Date:  2016-03-16

7.  Embryo transfer practices and perinatal outcomes by insurance mandate status.

Authors:  Sheree L Boulet; Sara Crawford; Yujia Zhang; Saswati Sunderam; Bruce Cohen; Dana Bernson; Patricia McKane; Marie A Bailey; Denise J Jamieson; Dmitry M Kissin
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 7.329

8.  Heterogeneity and the effect of mental health parity mandates on the labor market.

Authors:  Martin Andersen
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2015-07-08       Impact factor: 3.883

9.  Infertility evaluation and treatment among women in the United States.

Authors:  Lawrence M Kessler; Benjamin M Craig; Shayne M Plosker; Damon R Reed; Gwendolyn P Quinn
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2013-07-10       Impact factor: 7.329

10.  A qualitative inquiry of the financial concerns of couples opting to use preimplantation genetic diagnosis to prevent the transmission of known genetic disorders.

Authors:  Kathryn T Drazba; Michele A Kelley; Patricia E Hershberger
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-08-16       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.