Factors related to doctors' choice of rural pathway in general practice specialty training

Premala Sureshkumar, Chris Roberts, Tyler Clark, Michael Jones, Robert Hale, Marcia Grant

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the factors eligible applicants consider in electing for a rural pathway into specialty training. Design: Cohort study. Setting: Australia. Participants: Applicants to the Australian General Practice Training program. Main outcome measures: Applicants' initial preference of either a general or rural pathway to undertake specialty training. Results: Of the 2,221 applicants, 45% were Australian Medical Graduates (AMGs), 27% Foreign Graduates of Accredited Medical Schools (FGAMS) and 29% International Medical Graduates (IMGs). Through government regulation, two thirds (70%) were eligible to train on both general and rural pathways and a third (30%) were required to train rurally. For applicants eligible for general pathway (n = 1552), those with rural background [Odds Ratio (OR) = 3.7, 95% CI 2.7-5.2] and rural clinical school experience (OR = 2.0, 95% CI 1.5-2.8) were more likely to choose the rural pathway. In addition, FGAMS who were eligible for the general pathway were less likely to choose a rural pathway when compared with IMGs (OR = 0.33, 95%CI 0.1 = 0.7). In applicants who changed their training pathway from their initial to revised preference, lower Multiple-Mini-Interview (OR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.43-0.66) and Situational Judgement Test z-scores (OR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.56-0.83) were associated with a higher probability of changing from a general to rural pathway preference. Conclusion: For those eligible for a general or rural pathway, rural background and rural clinical school experience are associated with the decision to elect for rural training. Targeted support for international and foreign graduates of Australia/New Zealand schools may influence them to train rurally.

LanguageEnglish
Pages148-154
Number of pages7
JournalAustralian Journal of Rural Health
Volume25
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2017

Fingerprint

General Practice
Odds Ratio
Medical Schools
Foreign Medical Graduates
Government Regulation
New Zealand
Cohort Studies
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Interviews
Education

Keywords

  • registrar
  • rural background
  • rural clinical school
  • postgraduate
  • workforce planning

Cite this

Sureshkumar, Premala ; Roberts, Chris ; Clark, Tyler ; Jones, Michael ; Hale, Robert ; Grant, Marcia. / Factors related to doctors' choice of rural pathway in general practice specialty training. In: Australian Journal of Rural Health. 2017 ; Vol. 25, No. 3. pp. 148-154.
@article{431bec4f4aa844619116d89189c07d72,
title = "Factors related to doctors' choice of rural pathway in general practice specialty training",
abstract = "Objective: To investigate the factors eligible applicants consider in electing for a rural pathway into specialty training. Design: Cohort study. Setting: Australia. Participants: Applicants to the Australian General Practice Training program. Main outcome measures: Applicants' initial preference of either a general or rural pathway to undertake specialty training. Results: Of the 2,221 applicants, 45{\%} were Australian Medical Graduates (AMGs), 27{\%} Foreign Graduates of Accredited Medical Schools (FGAMS) and 29{\%} International Medical Graduates (IMGs). Through government regulation, two thirds (70{\%}) were eligible to train on both general and rural pathways and a third (30{\%}) were required to train rurally. For applicants eligible for general pathway (n = 1552), those with rural background [Odds Ratio (OR) = 3.7, 95{\%} CI 2.7-5.2] and rural clinical school experience (OR = 2.0, 95{\%} CI 1.5-2.8) were more likely to choose the rural pathway. In addition, FGAMS who were eligible for the general pathway were less likely to choose a rural pathway when compared with IMGs (OR = 0.33, 95{\%}CI 0.1 = 0.7). In applicants who changed their training pathway from their initial to revised preference, lower Multiple-Mini-Interview (OR = 0.54, 95{\%} CI 0.43-0.66) and Situational Judgement Test z-scores (OR = 0.68, 95{\%} CI 0.56-0.83) were associated with a higher probability of changing from a general to rural pathway preference. Conclusion: For those eligible for a general or rural pathway, rural background and rural clinical school experience are associated with the decision to elect for rural training. Targeted support for international and foreign graduates of Australia/New Zealand schools may influence them to train rurally.",
keywords = "registrar, rural background, rural clinical school, postgraduate, workforce planning",
author = "Premala Sureshkumar and Chris Roberts and Tyler Clark and Michael Jones and Robert Hale and Marcia Grant",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1111/ajr.12311",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "148--154",
journal = "The Australian journal of rural health",
issn = "1038-5282",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell, Wiley",
number = "3",

}

Factors related to doctors' choice of rural pathway in general practice specialty training. / Sureshkumar, Premala; Roberts, Chris; Clark, Tyler; Jones, Michael; Hale, Robert; Grant, Marcia.

In: Australian Journal of Rural Health, Vol. 25, No. 3, 06.2017, p. 148-154.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Factors related to doctors' choice of rural pathway in general practice specialty training

AU - Sureshkumar, Premala

AU - Roberts, Chris

AU - Clark, Tyler

AU - Jones, Michael

AU - Hale, Robert

AU - Grant, Marcia

PY - 2017/6

Y1 - 2017/6

N2 - Objective: To investigate the factors eligible applicants consider in electing for a rural pathway into specialty training. Design: Cohort study. Setting: Australia. Participants: Applicants to the Australian General Practice Training program. Main outcome measures: Applicants' initial preference of either a general or rural pathway to undertake specialty training. Results: Of the 2,221 applicants, 45% were Australian Medical Graduates (AMGs), 27% Foreign Graduates of Accredited Medical Schools (FGAMS) and 29% International Medical Graduates (IMGs). Through government regulation, two thirds (70%) were eligible to train on both general and rural pathways and a third (30%) were required to train rurally. For applicants eligible for general pathway (n = 1552), those with rural background [Odds Ratio (OR) = 3.7, 95% CI 2.7-5.2] and rural clinical school experience (OR = 2.0, 95% CI 1.5-2.8) were more likely to choose the rural pathway. In addition, FGAMS who were eligible for the general pathway were less likely to choose a rural pathway when compared with IMGs (OR = 0.33, 95%CI 0.1 = 0.7). In applicants who changed their training pathway from their initial to revised preference, lower Multiple-Mini-Interview (OR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.43-0.66) and Situational Judgement Test z-scores (OR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.56-0.83) were associated with a higher probability of changing from a general to rural pathway preference. Conclusion: For those eligible for a general or rural pathway, rural background and rural clinical school experience are associated with the decision to elect for rural training. Targeted support for international and foreign graduates of Australia/New Zealand schools may influence them to train rurally.

AB - Objective: To investigate the factors eligible applicants consider in electing for a rural pathway into specialty training. Design: Cohort study. Setting: Australia. Participants: Applicants to the Australian General Practice Training program. Main outcome measures: Applicants' initial preference of either a general or rural pathway to undertake specialty training. Results: Of the 2,221 applicants, 45% were Australian Medical Graduates (AMGs), 27% Foreign Graduates of Accredited Medical Schools (FGAMS) and 29% International Medical Graduates (IMGs). Through government regulation, two thirds (70%) were eligible to train on both general and rural pathways and a third (30%) were required to train rurally. For applicants eligible for general pathway (n = 1552), those with rural background [Odds Ratio (OR) = 3.7, 95% CI 2.7-5.2] and rural clinical school experience (OR = 2.0, 95% CI 1.5-2.8) were more likely to choose the rural pathway. In addition, FGAMS who were eligible for the general pathway were less likely to choose a rural pathway when compared with IMGs (OR = 0.33, 95%CI 0.1 = 0.7). In applicants who changed their training pathway from their initial to revised preference, lower Multiple-Mini-Interview (OR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.43-0.66) and Situational Judgement Test z-scores (OR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.56-0.83) were associated with a higher probability of changing from a general to rural pathway preference. Conclusion: For those eligible for a general or rural pathway, rural background and rural clinical school experience are associated with the decision to elect for rural training. Targeted support for international and foreign graduates of Australia/New Zealand schools may influence them to train rurally.

KW - registrar

KW - rural background

KW - rural clinical school

KW - postgraduate

KW - workforce planning

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84994108742&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/ajr.12311

DO - 10.1111/ajr.12311

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 148

EP - 154

JO - The Australian journal of rural health

T2 - The Australian journal of rural health

JF - The Australian journal of rural health

SN - 1038-5282

IS - 3

ER -