Observational studyNutrition & dietetics : the journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia2026
Two decades of Medicare: An updated review of Medicare-subsidised dietetics services in Australia.
Observational study in Nutrition & dietetics : the journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and baseline findings of a national dataset describing Australian private practice dietetics.Nutrition & dietetics : the journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia · 2026Article
- Two decades of Medicare: An updated review of Medicare-subsidised dietetics services in Australia.Nutrition & dietetics : the journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia · 2026Observational
- The business of dietetics: Results from the national Australian private practice dietetics dataset.Nutrition & dietetics : the journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimThis study aimed to describe the utilisation of item numbers for dietetic services available through the Australian Medicare Benefits Schedule, with particular focus on changes between 2015 and 2024.
methodsThis descriptive observational study used publicly available, population-level data from Medicare Australia describing item utilisation in terms of number and services per 100 000 population, benefit paid, and patient demographics for dietetic-related item numbers. Utilisation of related items for other allied health professions was also described. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics (frequency, percentage) and change in utilisation was calculated for periods defined a priori.
resultsThe total number of Medicare-subsidised dietetic services increased by 7%, to 1691 services per 100 000 population, between 2015 and 2024. However, the number of chronic disease dietetic services per 100 000 population decreased by 12% over the decade, while other allied health professions increased over the same period. In addition, the proportion of group services for diabetes delivered by dietitians declined from 7% in 2015 to 4% in 2024, with just 13 services claimed per 100 000 population. Conversely, utilisation of dietetic services for eating disorders has consistently increased, with an annual growth rate between 8% and 47%, seeing 273 dietetic eating disorder services claimed per 100 000 in 2024.
conclusionsChange in utilisation of Medicare-subsidised dietetic services varied over the last decade, with claims for eating disorders increasing while claims for chronic disease and diabetes group services decreased. The lack of dietitian-specific item numbers for case conferencing and some telehealth services impedes accurate evaluation of utilisation and, therefore, planning.
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.