ArticleJACC. Cardiovascular imaging2026
Distance and Likelihood of Cardiovascular Imaging Receipt Among Medicare Beneficiaries: Cardiovascular Imaging Deserts Among Medicare Beneficiaries.
Article in JACC. Cardiovascular imaging, 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.
- The impact of underdiagnosis and delay in care for patients with moderate and severe aortic stenosis: A real-world database cohort study.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026Article
- Boosting the IQ of Artificial Intelligence: Echocardiographic Big Data and Overcoming the Generalizability Gap.Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography : official publication of the American Society of Echocardiography · 2026Article
- Geographic Access to Urodynamics Studies in the United States: A Medicare-Based Geospatial Analysis.Cureus · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIt is unclear whether geographic distance to a cardiovascular imaging center (CVIC) is associated with receipt of cardiovascular imaging (CVI).
objectivesThis study sought to assess temporal trends in distance to a CVIC and examine the relationship of distance to a CVIC and receipt of CVI overall and by modality.
methodsAmong 64,260,530 older U.S. Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries from 2018 to 2021, the study measured individual distances to the nearest CVIC. Poisson regression was used to evaluate the likelihood of receipt of CVI as a function of distance, overall and by modality.
resultsOf those beneficiaries included (age: 73.0 ± 8 years; 54.6% female; 80.1% White), 17.5% underwent CVI. The number of CVICs increased (0.02% per year), but median distances to CVICs remained stable (3.3-3.4 miles). Compared with beneficiaries living 10 to 16 miles from a CVIC, distance >16 miles from a CVIC was associated with lower likelihood of receipt (rate ratio: 0.957 [95% CI: 0.956-0.959]; P < 0.001). The lowest likelihood of receipt was within 10 miles of services (rate ratio: 0.923 [95% CI: 0.921-0.924]; P < 0.001). Distances to cardiac computed tomography (CCT), cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), and positron emission tomography (PET) services were longer than distances to echocardiography and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) services: (median distance: CCT: 8.1 miles [Q1-Q3: 3.7-21.3 miles]; CMR: 17.4 miles [Q1-Q3: 7.3-43.3 miles]; and PET: 88.9 miles [Q1-Q3: 26.2-194.6 miles] vs echocardiography: 3.4 miles [Q1-Q3: 0.4-7.0 miles]; and SPECT: 3.8 miles [Q1-Q3: 1.3-7.9 miles]).
conclusionsFrom 2018 to 2021, the number of CVICs increased, although distances to CVICs remained stable. The lowest likelihood receipt of imaging overall was among those patients living within 10 miles of a CVIC, a finding suggesting that proximity is insufficient for access. CCT, CMR, and PET services were concentrated in large metropolitan academic centers.
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.