↓ Skip to main content

Geographic Variation in Use of Vestibular Testing among Medicare Beneficiaries

Overview of attention for article published in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
46 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.
Article details
Title
Geographic Variation in Use of Vestibular Testing among Medicare Beneficiaries
Published in
Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, November 2016
DOI 10.1177/0194599816676450
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Objective There is a lack of consensus regarding the indications for vestibular testing in the evaluation of dizziness and balance disorders. Geographic variation in health services utilization is associated with lack of consensus. To understand the variation in current practice, we investigated the patterns of use of vestibular testing and diagnosis codes for dizziness and balance disorders among individuals ≥65 years of age across different regions of the United States. Study Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Medicare administrative claims data. Subjects and Methods Using the Summarized Denominator file, a sample of the US population linked to the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare files (years 2000-2010), we identified persons who were ≥65 years of age. We used multivariable analyses to determine the factors associated with vestibular testing and diagnoses. Results Of the 231,984 eligible Medicare beneficiaries, 27% were diagnosed with dizziness and balance disorders. Patterns of use of vestibular tests (eye movement recording for spontaneous nystagmus, caloric testing, and rotary chair testing) varied significantly by geographic region. Rotary chair test utilization varied most. We found significant geographic variation in vestibular testing and diagnoses after controlling for age, sex, race, Medicaid participation, and rurality. Conclusions There may be opportunities to improve the consistency and efficiency of care for dizziness and balance disorders. It will be important to define appropriate levels of vestibular diagnostic testing and which tests add sufficient value to justify the costs. Further work is needed to better characterize the causes and consequences of variation in vestibular test utilization.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 20%
Student > Master 6 13%
Other 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Researcher 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 17 37%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 17 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 08 April 2020.
All research outputs
#11,485,932
of 34,457,357 outputs
Outputs from Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
#1,805
of 5,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,370
of 334,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
#84
of 257 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,457,357 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 65th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,396 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
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 334,122 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 257 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.