The independent source for health policy research, polling, and news.
The first fact sheet in a series on topics related to children, media and health focuses on video games — pulling together the key facts on the amount of time young people spend using video games, how use varies by age, gender and ethnicity, and the best research on the impact of video games on young players. Future issues will focus on violence on television, media ratings, and the online activities of teenagers.
The Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard University Survey Project’s latest findings appeared in an article in The Washington Post on October 20, 2002. The survey explores age-related variations in views of politics and policy, including voting behaviors, opinions of the government, and social values.
Full Report: Spending on the HIV/AIDS Epidemic: A Three Part Series
This compliation policy brief provides analysis of spending on the HIV/AIDS epidemic both by the United States government and globally. Included is an analysis of U.S. federal spending on the HIV/AIDS epidemic since FY 1981; spending by the U.S. on global HIV/AIDS activities and programs; and global spending on HIV/AIDS in resource-poor settings, including bilateral, multilateral, and private sector support.This policy brief was prepared as part of AIDS at 20: A National HIV/AIDS Policy Initiative, a joint initiative of the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Ford Foundation. You may download the full report or each policy brief separately.
A hotly debated issue in Congress has been the issue of when health maintenance organizations, health insurers, and those who administer health benefit plans should be financially liable to their plan participants for a denial of a claim or for damages for any injuries that result from such denials (known as health plan liability ). This new report by Gary Claxton of the Georgetown Institute for Health Care Research and Policy describes the health plan liability issue, compares the different health plan liability provisions passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives, and provides two scenarios that illustrate the differences between the Senate and House liability provisions.
This issue update reviews abortion since the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade legalized it in 1973. Every state has laws regulating some aspect of the provision of abortion, and many have passed restrictions that are now in effect, such as parental consent or notification requirements; mandated counseling and waiting periods; and limits on funding for abortion.
Issue Brief (.pdf)
Racial Ethnic Difference in Cardiac Care: The Weight of the Evidence
Numerous studies over the past two decades have documented racial and ethnic differences in care for heart conditions. To assess the quality of the evidence and to summarize the information for a physician audience, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation collaborated with the American College of Cardiology Foundation to review the body of research on racial/ethnic differences in cardiac care.
There is credible evidence that minority patients are less likely than white patients to receive invasive cardiac procedures such as catheterization, angioplasty, bypass surgery and thrombolytic therapy even when patient characteristics are similar. These disparities remain even after adjusting for such factors as age, sex, insurance status and heart disease severity. Of the 81 studies investigating racial/ethnic differences in care over the past two decades, 68 found disparities in care for at least one of the racial/ethnic minority groups under study.
This fact sheet is one component of an initiative to raise physician awareness about disparities in medical care.
Numerous studies over the past two decades have documented racial and ethnic differences in care for heart conditions. To assess the quality of the evidence and to summarize the information for a physician audience, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation collaborated with the American College of Cardiology Foundation to review the body of research on racial/ethnic differences in cardiac care.
There is credible evidence that minority patients are less likely than white patients to receive invasive cardiac procedures such as catheterization, angioplasty, bypass surgery and thrombolytic therapy even when patient characteristics are similar. These disparities remain even after adjusting for such factors as age, sex, insurance status and heart disease severity. Of the 81 studies investigating racial/ethnic differences in care over the past two decades, 68 found disparities in care for at least one of the racial/ethnic minority groups under study.
This report is one component of an initiative to raise physician awareness about disparities in medical care.
Summary Report
Numerous studies over the past two decades have documented racial and ethnic differences in care for heart conditions. To assess the quality of the evidence and to summarize the information for a physician audience, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation collaborated with the American College of Cardiology Foundation to review the body of research on racial/ethnic differences in cardiac care.
There is credible evidence that minority patients are less likely than white patients to receive invasive cardiac procedures such as catheterization, angioplasty, bypass surgery and thrombolytic therapy even when patient characteristics are similar. These disparities remain even after adjusting for such factors as age, sex, insurance status and heart disease severity. Of the 81 studies investigating racial/ethnic differences in care over the past two decades, 68 found disparities in care for at least one of the racial/ethnic minority groups under study.
This summary report is one component of an initiative to raise physician awareness about disparities in medical care.
How Have Abortion Practice, Policy, Politics, and Public Opinion Changed?
We are fast approaching the 30th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion in the United States. In January 2003, a generation will have grown up knowing abortion as a legal right for American women. Yet, abortion remains a hotly debated issue in this country.
So, 30 years later, where are we?
On October 8, at the most recent Emerging Issues in Reproductive Health Briefing a panel of researchers, public policy experts, and abortion providers discussed the current state of abortion politics and policies, the rates of abortion in recent years, who is having abortions today teens, low-income women, married women – how and why have these profiles changed, and what the future of the Supreme Court holds for abortion. The panel discussion featured leading experts, Rachel K. Jones, PhD, Senior Research Associate, Alan Guttmacher Institute; Kathryn Kolbert, JD, legal and public policy expert on abortion and reproductive rights at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center; Sarah Brown, MSPH, Director, The National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy; and William F. Harrison, MD, a Fayetteville, Arkansas, ob/gyn for more than 30 years.
This survey snapshot summarizes the results of a Foundation survey of women’s health care providers between May andAugust 2001. Findings show that a relatively small proportion 6 percent of gynecologists and 1 percent of general practice physicians had used the drug to provide early medical abortions in the nine months since distribution began. Gynecologists who currently or recently provided surgical abortions are most likely to report that they now offer medical abortions or plan to do so soon.