Notice bibliographique
Résumé
What Is the Issue? Canada’s Drug Agency (CDA-AMC) received a request to analyze CT exam volume trends over a 16-year period to inform policy decisions related to diagnostic imaging capacity and access. Because CT scans play a key role in diagnostics, growing demand may impact imaging services, wait times, and access. With the number of CT units growing from 419 in 2007 to 560 in 2022–2023, there is a need for analysis to better understand how this growth aligns with current demand and evolving clinical needs. Demand may be influenced by emerging clinical applications, such as biopsies, drainages, and other interventional uses of CT as well as changing population needs, available health care resources, and advancements in medical practices. Analyzing trends in overall and per capita exam volumes will provide insights to guide strategic decisions regarding resource allocation, workforce development, and potential expansion of diagnostic imaging capacity. What Did We Do? We examined trends in both total (absolute) and per capita (relative) CT exams using data from the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) and the Canadian Medical Imaging Inventory (CMII) — collected at 7 intervals between 2007 and 2022–2023. This also included reviewing the total number of CT units and CT units per capita. The analysis focused on 11 jurisdictions that maintained consistent CT capacity throughout the entire period. The results show how the use of CT machines has evolved nationwide. What Did We Find? Between 2007 and 2022–2023, there was growth in CT exam volumes across Canada, although this growth was not consistent every year: Total CT exam volumes increased from 3.38 million to 6.42 million, reflecting a national growth of 90%. Total CT exam volumes per thousand people increased from 102.5 to 160.2, representing a national increase in volume of 57%. CT exam growth varied across jurisdictions, with total exam increases ranging from 27% to 208%, and per capita volumes experiencing an increase of 10% to 120%. When comparing the growth in the jurisdictions to the national average between 2007 and 2022–2023, most jurisdictions saw their overall and per capita CT exam volumes rise above the national average. What Does This Mean? This report suggests that CT is being used more often, and the role of CT continues to evolve. Given the increasing use of CT, decision-makers may wish to consider capacity challenges and ensure that existing CT and supporting technologies, workflows, and processes are used with more efficiency. Addressing these areas may help reduce wait times, support recruitment and retention efforts, and ensure sufficient capacity to meet future demand. The variation in exam rates across jurisdictions highlights the importance of tailoring solutions to local needs and contexts. The insights gained from this report can inform strategic decisions related to resource allocation, workforce development, and alignment of diagnostic imaging capacity with evolving health care needs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».