Effects of Mental Health Benefits Legislation

ion and Evaluation of Studies Two reviewers evaluated each study using an adaptation of a standardized abstraction form, which included a quality assessment (www.thecommunityguide.org/methods/abstractionform. pdf). Disagreements were resolved by discussion and team consensus. DistillerSR, version 1, was used to manage references, screen citations, and abstract data. Microsoft Excel 2010 was used for effect size calculation and other analyses. Papers based on the same study data set were linked; only the paper with the most complete data (e.g., longest follow-up) was included in analyses. See Appendix C (available online) for more details. Summarizing the Body of Evidence on Effectiveness Effect measurement and data synthesis. Effect estimates of absolute percentage point (pct pt) change or relative percentage change were calculated with corresponding 95% CIs and adjusted for baseline data when possible. Regression coefficients or ORs were used as the effect estimates when reported. Summary effect estimates (medians); interquartile intervals (IQIs); and number of studies are reported when outcomes contained five or more data points. Results for most outcomes of interest were synthesized descriptively and p-values are reported when available. Tables illustrating the effect direction are used to display effects based on methods developed by Thomson and Thomas (see Appendix C, available online, for formulas and details on data synthesis). Analyses were conducted in 2012. Figure 2. Flow chart showing number of studies identified, revie Subgroup analyses. Two comparisons were assessed qualitatively: (1) stronger parity legislation versus no or weak parity legislation and (2) mutually exclusive categories of parity versus no or weak parity legislation. Categories of parity were based on primary author’s definitions. Subgroup analyses were also planned to compare outcomes by settings (e.g., U.S. states); clients (e.g., age group, racial and ethnic group, type of mental illness); employer size; and health plan type (e.g., public vs. private).