MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082812354 · doi:10.22605/rrh5835

Retaining graduates of non-metropolitan medical schools for practice in the local area: the importance of locally based postgraduate training pathways in Australia and Canada

2020· article· en· W3082812354 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Torres Woolley, John C. Hogenbirk, Roger Strasser

Bibliographic record

VenueRural and Remote Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsNOSM UniversityLaurentian University
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
KeywordsMetropolitan areaTraining (meteorology)Medical educationMedical schoolRural areaMedicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to identify commonalities between one regionally based medical school in Australia and one in Canada regarding the association between postgraduate training location and a doctor's practice location once fully qualified in a medical specialty. METHODS: Data were obtained using a cross-sectional survey of graduates of the James Cook University (JCU) medical school, Queensland, Australia, who had completed advanced training to become a specialist (a 'Fellow') in that field (response rate = 60%, 197 of 326). Medical education, postgraduate training and practice data were obtained for 400 of 409 (98%) fully licensed doctors who completed undergraduate medical education or postgraduate training or both at the Northern Ontario School of Medicine (NOSM), Ontario, Canada. Binary logistic regression used postgraduate training location to predict practice in the school's service region (northern Australia or northern Ontario). Separate analyses were conducted for medical discipline groupings of general/family practitioner, general specialist and subspecialist (JCU only). RESULTS: For JCU graduates, significant associations were found between training in a northern Australian hospital at least once during postgraduate training and current (2018) northern Australian practice for all three discipline subgroups: family practitioner (p<0.001; prevalence odds ratio (POR)=30.0; 95% confidence interval (CI): 6.7-135.0), general specialist (p=0.002; POR=30.3; 95%CI: 3.3-273.4) and subspecialist (p=0.027; POR=6.5; 95%CI: 1.2-34.0). Overall, 38% (56/149) of JCU graduates who had completed a Fellowship were currently practising in northern Australia. For NOSM-trained doctors, a significant positive effect of training location on practice location was detected for family practice doctors but not for general specialist doctors. Family practitioners who completed their undergraduate medical education at NOSM and their postgraduate training in northern Ontario had a statistically significant (p<0.001) POR of 36.6 (95%CI: 16.9-79.2) of practising in northern Ontario (115/125) versus other regions, whereas those who completed only their postgraduate training in northern Ontario (46/85) had a statistically significant (p<0.001) POR of 3.7 (95%CI: 2.1-6.8) relative to doctors who only completed their undergraduate medical education at NOSM (28/117). Overall, 30% (22/73) of NOSM's general speciality graduates currently practise in northern Ontario. CONCLUSION: The findings support increasing medical graduate training numbers in rural underserved regions, specifically locating full specialty training programs in regional and rural centres in a 'flipped training' model, whereby specialty trainees are based in rural or regional clinical settings with some rotations to the cities. In these circumstances, the doctors would see their regional or rural centre as 'home base' with the city rotations as necessary to complete their training requirements while preparing to practise near where they train.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRural and Remote HealthSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207