↓ Skip to main content

A scoping review of the association between rural medical education and rural practice location

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
Title
A scoping review of the association between rural medical education and rural practice location
Published in
Human Resources for Health, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12960-015-0017-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jane Farmer, Amanda Kenny, Carol McKinstry, Richard D Huysmans

Abstract

Inequitable distribution of the medical workforce is an international problem that undermines universal access to healthcare. Governments in many countries have invested in rural-focused medical education programs to increase the supply of rural doctors. Using a structured five-step approach, a scoping review was conducted to map the existing evidence on the relationship between professional entry-level, pre-vocational medical education delivered in rural settings and rural workforce outcomes. Key search terms were developed, with database searches yielding 37 relevant articles. During data charting, a set of types of studies emerged, and we developed a typology to assist with article sorting and information structuring. Medical students attending a rural campus or spending time in a rural area are more likely to practise in non-metropolitan areas upon graduation than students studying at a city campus. In many cases, these positive findings could be confounded by students having a rural origin or being predisposed to want rural work. There is some evidence to suggest that the longer a person spends time as a medical student in a rural area, the more likely they are to work rurally following graduation. Overall, the articles located had limitations related to small sample size, inconsistent definition of rurality and lack of attention to controlling for variables that might influence rural practice decision, for example, rural background. Comparative data were lacking, and most studies were conducted by staff from the medical schools that were the focus of the research. There was no consideration given in any study found to the cost-effectiveness of entry-level medical education delivered in rural settings versus other ways of producing rural practitioners. Given limitations, available evidence suggests that medical education in a rural location does increase the number of medical graduates that will work in a rural place. There are indications of a gradient effect where increased rural practice exposure during medical education leads to more rurally located graduates; however, robust studies are needed to verify this finding. Given the significant funding being directed to universities to increase graduates that will work rurally, appropriate future research is recommended.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Portugal 1 2%
Indonesia 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 57 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 19%
Researcher 11 17%
Student > Master 8 13%
Unspecified 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 21 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 40%
Social Sciences 10 16%
Unspecified 9 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 9 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 19 May 2015.
All research outputs
#1,797,916
of 12,230,555 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#241
of 652 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,514
of 223,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#10
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,230,555 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 652 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 223,305 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 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 67% of its contemporaries.