Interventions to improve recruitment and retention of physicians in rural and remote Canada: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Rural and remote regions of Canada struggle to attract and retain an adequate healthcare workforce to provide the healthcare needed by their local residents. The purpose of this systematic review is to explore current literature that has analyzed strategies for recruitment and retention of physicians to rural and remote regions in Canada.
 Methods: Scopus and PubMed were searched for articles. To be included in the review, the titles yielded from the initial search had to be in English and meet one of the inclusion criteria: (1) address rural and/or remote healthcare, (2) focus on medical students or physicians, and (3) discuss recruitment or retention strategies. Titles were excluded that discussed non-OECD countries, or that were not original journal articles. The final sample of articles were analyzed by both reviewers for content and emerging themes.
 Summary of Results and Conclusion: The initial search yielded a total of 3397 titles for review. After applying criteria described above, 35 articles remained for review. A variety of recruitment and retention themes were identified targeting physicians before, during, and after their medical education. The most effective strategies consistently appear to be those aimed before medical education, specifically admitting medical students who have a rural background. This review aims to provide a summary of the currently available research to assist with evidence-based decision making to increase supply and retention of rural physicians.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 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".