When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled March 1 in Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual, the justices gave journalists a chance to write about how the case affects state efforts to collect data for their all-payer claims database (APCD) programs.
In a 6-2 decision (pdf), the court ruled against the plaintiff, allowing Liberty Mutual Insurance Company to withhold its employees’ health claims data from Vermont’s APCD.
The plaintiff was Alfred Gobeille, chairman of Vermont’s Green Mountain Care Board. Under Vermont law, the board is charged with controlling the rate of growth in health care costs through “regulatory and planning tools.” One tool is Vermont’s all-payer claims database. We covered this case when it was argued before the court in December. Continue reading
Source: California Healthcare Compare and Consumer ReportsCalifornia Healthcare Compare provides price and quality data for hospitals and physicians in 18 regions of California.
California has embraced the Affordable Care Act in big way. It launched one of the first and most robust state-run health insurance exchanges, and expanded its Medicaid program (known as Medi-Cal) to enroll the uninsured.
As a result, the state’s uninsured rate dropped from 6.5 million residents in 2013 (which is 17.2 percent of the state’s population) to 4.8 million last year (12.4 percent), according to the U.S. Census Bureau. (See AHCJ’s coverage of the bureau’s latest data release here and here.) Continue reading
If it seems the newest studies are always reporting some new link – an association between two things or an increase or decrease in this, that or the other – it’s not your imagination.
Positive findings, those which find … “something,” tend to end up in journals more often. But a recent study in PLOS ONE suggests that this trend has decreased, thanks to a change in trial reporting standards around the year 2000. Continue reading
When writing about transparency in health care prices and quality, journalists should expose the myths that health care providers promote. That’s the advice Francois de Brantes gave during a session on price and quality transparency at Health Journalism 2015 last month.
The executive director of the Health Care Incentives Improvement Institute (HCI3), de Brantes (@Fdebrantes) said, “Call them on their bull sh–. Their arguments against price and quality transparency are bogus.”
Yet when state legislatures consider laws promoting the public reporting of health care prices and quality ratings, provider organizations often lobby against these laws. “What are they protecting?” he asked. “Doesn’t the public have a right to know?” Continue reading
In early February, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services advertised a telephone question-and-answer session intended for “non-press associated individuals.” Essentially anyone could listen in – except the members of the media. Crazy, right?
But when a member of the Association of Health Care Journalists asked CMS to change the wording of the February invitation, the agency’s press office declined.
Learning of this, Irene Wielawski, chair of AHCJ’s Right to Know Committee, immediately contacted Mark Weber, a high-ranking public affairs official at HHS with whom the committee speaks regularly. Weber took action, and within days, a new invitation went out specifying that the call was open to all interested “people,” with no restrictions on the media.
A small victory – but a swift one, and an example of how a sustained push for government transparency can make a difference. Continue reading