The Rural Integrated Community Clerkship: a vital stretch in the Alberta rural physician workforce pipeline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Longitudinal integrated clerkships are thought to operate synergistically with factors such as rural background and practice intent to determine medical graduates' practice types and locations-sometimes known as the pipeline effect. We examined the influence of the rural integrated community clerkship (ICC) at the University of Alberta on students choosing family medicine and rural practice. Methods: We completed a retrospective cohort analysis of graduates from 2009-2016. The cohort was cross-referenced by background, type of clerkship, practice type and practice location. We used χ2 analyses and risk ratios to measure the relative likelihood that ICC students would settle on rural practice and/or family medicine. Results: ICC participation had more influence than rural background on students' choice of rural and/or family practice, and both factors were synergistic. Rotation-based clerkship students were least likely to enter family medicine or rural practice. Conclusions: The ICC is a clerkship model that influences students to become rural and/or family physicians, regardless of their rural/urban origins. The ICC diverts rural-interested students into rural practice and protects rural-origin students from ending up in urban practice. Expanding ICC infrastructure, including sustaining the rural physician workforce, will benefit rural Alberta communities by increasing the numbers of UA graduates in rural practice.
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 | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".