Perceptions of Important Retention and Recruitment Factors by Therapists in Northwestern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recruitment and retention of health professionals in rural and remote communities are well-known challenges. Although the literature states that lifestyle factors and being from a rural background influence recruitment and retention, much of the research is dated and of limited relevance to rehabilitation professionals. This study reports on a survey of physical therapists (PTs) and occupational therapists (OTs) in northwestern Ontario. Seventy-four percent of the OTs and PTs from this geographically isolated region of Canada responded to a mail survey examining factors that influenced their job recruitment and retention decisions. Availability of leisure and recreation activities, proximity of family of origin, need for OTs and PTs and influence of spouse or partner frequently contributed to recruitment decisions and were also important in retention decisions. Although professional autonomy was an important source of job satisfaction for the respondents, almost one-third reported a feeling of professional isolation. Professional development initiatives appeared to influence job satisfaction but were unlikely to influence working life decisions. The findings suggest that recruitment and retention strategies should be multifaceted to reflect the complexity of therapists' decision-making.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".