↓ Skip to main content

Recruiting Rural Healthcare Providers Today: a Systematic Review of Training Program Success and Determinants of Geographic Choices

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
79 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
157 Mendeley
Title
Recruiting Rural Healthcare Providers Today: a Systematic Review of Training Program Success and Determinants of Geographic Choices
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11606-017-4210-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ian T. MacQueen, Melinda Maggard-Gibbons, Gina Capra, Laura Raaen, Jesus G. Ulloa, Paul G. Shekelle, Isomi Miake-Lye, Jessica M. Beroes, Susanne Hempel

Abstract

Rural areas have historically struggled with shortages of healthcare providers; however, advanced communication technologies have transformed rural healthcare, and practice in underserved areas has been recognized as a policy priority. This systematic review aims to assess reasons for current providers' geographic choices and the success of training programs aimed at increasing rural provider recruitment. This systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42015025403) searched seven databases for published and gray literature on the current cohort of US rural healthcare practitioners (2005 to March 2017). Two reviewers independently screened citations for inclusion; one reviewer extracted data and assessed risk of bias, with a senior systematic reviewer checking the data; quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Of 7276 screened citations, we identified 31 studies exploring reasons for geographic choices and 24 studies documenting the impact of training programs. Growing up in a rural community is a key determinant and is consistently associated with choosing rural practice. Most existing studies assess physicians, and only a few are based on multivariate analyses that take competing and potentially correlated predictors into account. The success rate of placing providers-in-training in rural practice after graduation, on average, is 44% (range 20-84%; N = 31 programs). We did not identify program characteristics that are consistently associated with program success. Data are primarily based on rural tracks for medical residents. The review provides insight into the relative importance of demographic characteristics and motivational factors in determining which providers should be targeted to maximize return on recruitment efforts. Existing programs exposing students to rural practice during their training are promising but require further refining. Public policy must include a specific focus on the trajectory of the healthcare workforce and must consider alternative models of healthcare delivery that promote a more diverse, interdisciplinary combination of providers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 157 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 11%
Researcher 15 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 10%
Other 13 8%
Student > Bachelor 11 7%
Other 27 17%
Unknown 58 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 16%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 22 14%
Unknown 62 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 50. 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 10 October 2023.
All research outputs
#845,875
of 25,658,139 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#676
of 8,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,882
of 448,316 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#6
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,658,139 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,233 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 448,316 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.