ArticleBMC health services research2026
The current landscape of Ohio otolaryngologists and associated conditions: a state-level analysis.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs demographics continue to shift in the United States, the access gap to physicians in specialized fields remains of utmost importance. This study examined the prevalence of otolaryngologists and otolaryngology subspecialists in Ohio, emphasizing related head and neck conditions and associations with social determinants of health.
methodsThis cross-sectional study utilized data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the CDC’s Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (CDC WONDER) mortality file. Health outcomes for all 88 counties in Ohio, Appalachian versus non-Appalachian county status, and otolaryngologist distribution were examined using t-tests and proportion tests. T-tests also assessed disparities in the prevalence of hearing impairment and oral malignancies, Pearson correlation tests evaluated associations between otolaryngologists and various social determinants of health.
resultsA total of 361 otolaryngologists practiced in Ohio. The mean number of otolaryngologists per county differed across Appalachian and non-Appalachian regions (1.3 ± 1.7 vs. 5.7 ± 14.0; P = 0.02) and southeastern regions (1.2 ± 1.4 vs. 4.6 ± 12.3; P = 0.03). However, the population-adjusted mean did not differ between Appalachian and non-Appalachian counties (P = 0.4) or southeastern and non-southeastern counties (P = 0.8). The prevalence of hearing impairment was higher in non-Appalachian counties (6.1 ± 1.2% vs. 5.6 ± 1.1%; P = 0.03); no difference was observed in southeastern and non-southeastern counties. In counties reporting at least one case of oral cancer, Appalachian counties had a higher prevalence of oral cancers compared to non-Appalachian counties (5.6 ± 2.3 vs. 4.4 ± 1.3, P = 0.04). In relation to social determinants of health, a significant negative relationship was observed between otolaryngologists and rurality (R=-0.2, P = 0.02) and long commutes (R=-0.2, P = 0.01).
conclusionWe observed lower otolaryngologist density and greater access challenges in Appalachian and southeastern counties, which may require patients to travel longer distances to receive specialty care or rely on less specialized providers. Targeted outreach initiatives and regional clinics are needed to address these disparities.
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.