ArticleThe Australian journal of rural health2025
Use of Allied Health Services in Rural Northern Victoria, Australia.
Article in The Australian journal of rural health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
objectiveLittle is known about the socio-demographic factors associated with the use of allied health services in rural Australia. The objective of this study was to determine which factors were associated with the use of various modes of allied health in a region of Northern Victoria.
methodsThis is a secondary analysis of the Crossroads-II population health study. Generalised linear mixed models were constructed.
designHouseholds were selected at random through address local government area lists. Data were collected by door-to-door surveying. SETTINGS: The northern part of the Goulburn Valley, Victoria, including one large rural conurbation (MM 3) and three medium rural towns (MM 4).
participantsOver 15 years of age.
main outcome measuresUse of allied health services.
resultsThe odds of using audiology (1.047 [1.035, 1.059]), optometry (1.034 [1.027, 1.042]) and podiatry (1.052 [1.039, 1.066]) increased with age, and psychology decreased (0.985 [0.974, 0.997]). Females had lower odds than males for audiology (0.708 [0.553, 0.907]) and greater odds for optometry (1.712 [1.421, 2.064]) and pharmacy advice (1.593 [1.317, 1.927]). Greater odds were observed forbeing Australian-born and pharmacy advice (1.581 [1.149, 2.175]), English spoken at home and physiotherapy (2.415 [1.279, 4.560]), a bachelor's degree and psychology (1.579 [1.011, 2.466]) and pharmacy advice (1.296 [1.002, 1.675]), not working and psychology (3.518 [1.999, 6.191]) and social work (4.202 [2.110, 8.367]). Those unable to work had greater odds of using six of the eight services investigated.
conclusionSocio-demographic associations with allied health use vary across disciplines. For this population in rural Victoria, socio-demographic associations were observed for all of the allied health modalities studied. Such relationships need to be studied in other rural and allied health contexts.
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.