Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25946125›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Geographic Distribution of CT, MRI and PET Devices in Japan: A Longitudinal Analysis Based on National Census Data.

Masatoshi Matsumoto, Soichi Koike, Saori Kashima, Kazuo Awai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Thoracic cancer · 2022
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Asymptomatic pulmonaryIDCases · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. [Large-Scale Medical Equipment - An Analysis of Supply Structures 20 Years after the Abolition of Site Planning].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2022
    Article
  19. Adoption of large-scale medical equipment: the impact of competition in the German inpatient sector.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Masatoshi MatsumotoDepartment of Community-Based Medical System, Faculty of Medicine, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Soichi KoikeDivision of Health Policy and Management, Center for Community Medicine, Jichi Medical University, Tochigi, Japan.
Saori KashimaDepartment of Public Health and Health Policy, Institute of Biomedical & Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.
Kazuo AwaiDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, Institute of Biomedical & Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundJapan has the most CT and MRI scanners per unit population in the world; however, the geographic distribution of these technologies is currently unknown. Moreover, nothing is known of the cause-effect relationship between the number of diagnostic imaging devices and their geographic distribution.

methodsData on the number of CT, MRI and PET devices and that of their utilizations in all 1829 municipalities of Japan was generated, based on the Static Survey of Medical Institutions conducted by the government. The inter-municipality equity of the number of devices or utilizations was evaluated with Gini coefficient.

resultsBetween 2005 and 2011, the number of CT, MRI and PET devices in Japan increased by 47% (8789 to 12945), 19% (5034 to 5990) and 70% (274 to 466), respectively. Gini coefficient of the number of devices was largest for PET and smallest for CT (p for PET-MRI difference <0.001; MRI-CT difference <0.001). For all three modalities, Gini coefficient steadily decreased (p for 2011-2005 difference: <0.001 for CT; 0.003 for MRI; and <0.001 for PET). The number of devices in old models (single-detector CT, MRI<1.5 tesla, and conventional PET) decreased, while that in new models (multi-detector CT, MRI≥1.5 tesla, and PET-CT) increased. Gini coefficient of the old models increased or remained unchanged (increase rate of 9%, 3%, and -1%; p for 2011-2008 difference <0.001, 0.072, and 0.562, respectively), while Gini coefficient of the new models decreased (-10%, -9%, and -10%; p for 2011-2008 difference <0.001, <0.001, and <0.001 respectively). Similar results were observed in terms of utilizations.

conclusionsThe more abundant a modality, the more equal the modality's distribution. Any increase in the modality made its distribution more equal. The geographic distribution of the diagnostic imaging technology in Japan appears to be affected by spatial competition derived from a market force.

Indexed as

CensusesHealthcare DisparitiesHumansJapanLongitudinal StudiesMagnetic Resonance ImagingPopulation DensityPositron-Emission TomographyTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID25946125
PMCPMC4422695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.