ArticleBMC health services research2024
Temporal and geographical variations in diagnostic imaging in Norway.
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- CT sinus imaging utilization in Norway: trends over time and variation by region, age, and sex.Research in health services & regions · 2026Article
- Temporal and geographical variations of chest x-rays: A ten-year register study from Norway.Acta radiologica open · 2025Article
- Temporal and geographical variations in musculoskeletal imaging: a register-based study in Norway with focus on potential low-value imaging.Research in health services & regions · 2025Article
- Nationwide data-driven quality improvement in ultrasound medicine: insights from an indicator-based initiative in China.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnwarranted temporal and geographical variations are acknowledged as a profound problem for equal access and justice in the provision of health services. Even more, they challenge the quality, safety, and efficiency of such services. This is highly relevant for imaging services.
objectiveTo analyse the temporal and geographical variation in the number of diagnostic images in Norway from 2013 to 2021.
methodsData on outpatient imaging provided by the Norwegian Health Economics Administration (HELFO) and inpatient data afforded by fourteen hospital trusts and hospitals in Norway. Data include the total number of imaging examinations according to the Norwegian Classification of Radiological Procedures (NCRP). Analyses were performed with descriptive statistics.
resultsMore than 37 million examinations were performed in Norway during 2013-2021 giving an average of 4.2 million examinations per year. In 2021 there was performed and average of 0.8 examinations per person and 2.2 examinations per person for the age group > 80. There was a 9% increase in the total number of examinations from 2013 to 2015 and a small and stable decrease of 0.5% per year from 2015 to 2021 (with the exception of 2020 due to the pandemic). On average 71% of all examinations were outpatient examinations and 32% were conducted at private imaging centres. There were substantial variations between the health regions, with Region South-East having 53.1% more examinations per inhabitant than Region West. The geographical variation was even more outspoken when comparing catchment areas, where Oslo University Hospital Trust had twice as many examinations per inhabitant than Finnmark Hospital Trust.
conclusionAs the population in Norway is homogeneous it is difficult to attribute the variations to socio-economic or demographic factors. Unwarranted and supply-sensitive variations are challenging for healthcare systems where equal access and justice traditionally are core values.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.