Recruitment and retention of occupational therapists and physiotherapists in rural regions: a meta-synthesis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Significant efforts have been made to address the shortage of health professionals in rural communities. In the face of increasing demand for rehabilitation services, strategies for recruiting and retaining occupational therapists (OTs) and physiotherapists (PTs) have yielded limited success. This study aims to broaden the understanding of factors associated with recruitment and retention of OTs and PTs in rural regions, through a synthesis of evidence from qualitative studies found in the literature. METHODS: A systematic search of three databases was conducted for studies published between 1980 - 2009 specific to the recruitment and retention of OTs and PTs to rural areas. Studies deemed eligible were appraised using the McMaster Critical Review Form. Employing an iterative process, we conducted a thematic analysis of studies and developed second order interpretations to gain new insight into factors that influence rural recruitment and retention. RESULTS: Of the 615 articles retrieved, 12 qualitative studies met the eligibility criteria. Our synthesis revealed that therapists' decision to locate, stay or leave rural communities was influenced to a greater degree by the availability of and access to practice supports, opportunities for professional growth and understanding the context of rural practice, than by location. The second-order analysis revealed the benefits of a strength-based inquiry in determining recruitment and retention factors. The themes that emerged were 1) support from the organization influences retention, 2) with support, challenges can become rewards and assets, and 3) an understanding of the challenges associated with rural practice prior to arrival influences retention. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-synthesis illustrates how universally important practice supports are in the recruitment and retention of rehabilitation professionals in rural practice. While not unique to rural practice, the findings of this synthesis provide employers and health service planners with information necessary to make evidence-informed decisions regarding recruitment and retention to improve availability of health services for rural residents.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it