↓ Skip to main content

The growth of Medicare rebatable cone beam computed tomography and panoramic radiography in Australia

Overview of attention for article published in Australian Dental Journal, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The growth of Medicare rebatable cone beam computed tomography and panoramic radiography in Australia
Published in
Australian Dental Journal, November 2015
DOI 10.1111/adj.12250
Pubmed ID
Authors

L F Brown, P Monsour

Abstract

There is a lack of objective data documenting the growth of cone beam radiology in Australia. Since July 1 2011, Medicare rebates for CBCT scans have been available. The aim of this study was to examine the Medicare data on the use of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), in order to quantify the growth of this technology over a three year period and to assess if the growth of Medicare rebatable CBCT was impacting upon the use of Medicare rebatable dental panoramic radiology (PR). In the period of July 2011 to June 2014, a total of 226,232 CBCTs and 2,881,351 panoramic radiographs were rebated through Medicare. The rate of CBCT services provided per 100,000 population increased by 42.3 percent over the three year period, whereas the rate of panoramic radiographs remained fairly constant. From the age group 5-14 years through to 55-64 years, females received more CBCTs and panoramic radiographs than males. The total number of panoramic radiographs rebated through Medicare increased slightly over each previous three year time periods (2005-2008 and 2008-2011). However, there was a steady decrease in the number of panoramic radiographs requested for surgical diagnosis, which may indicate a growing preference for CBCT radiology assessment for surgical assessments. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 18%
Student > Bachelor 2 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 12%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 6 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 59%
Unknown 7 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 November 2014.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Australian Dental Journal
#569
of 768 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#290,562
of 394,382 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian Dental Journal
#6
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 768 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 394,382 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.