Original Research

The Healthcare Travelling Roadshow: a qualitative study of a rural community engagement initiative in Canada

AUTHORS

name here
Sean Maurice1
PhD, MEDD Site Director Years 1 & 2 *

Kristjan Mytting2 BHSc, Medical Student

John Quinn Gentles3 MD, Surgery Resident

name here
Robin Roots4
BHSc PT, MSc , Senior Instructor

Alina G Constantin5 MD, PhD, Senior Lab Instructor

Sonya L Kruger6 BBA, Communications Officer

Shelley Sim7 Councillor District of Clearwater

Warren Brock8 BA, Communications Manager

name here
Olusegun Oyedele9
MBChB, PhD , Site Director

name here
John A Soles10
MD, Physician and Chief of Staff

name here
David Snadden11
MBChB, MD, Rural Doctor’s UBC Chair in Rural Health

CORRESPONDENCE

*Dr Sean Maurice

AFFILIATIONS

1 Northern Medical Program, University of Northern BC, 3333 University Way, Prince George, BC, V2N 4Z9, Canada; and Department of Cellular & Physiological Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 2350 Health Sciences Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada

2, 5, 6 Northern Medical Program, University of Northern BC, 3333 University Way, Prince George, BC, V2N 4Z9, Canada

3 Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 2775 Laurel Street, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada

4 Northern Medical Program, University of Northern BC, 3333 University Way, Prince George, BC, V2N 4Z9, Canada; and Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Northern and Rural Cohort at University of Northern BC, 3333 University Way, Prince George, BC, V2N 4Z9, Canada

7 District of Clearwater, BC, Canada

8 Southern Medical Program, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia - Okanagan Campus, 1088 Discovery Avenue, Kelowna, BC, V1V 1V7, Canada

9 Department of Cellular & Physiological Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 2350 Health Sciences Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada; and Southern Medical Program, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia - Okanagan Campus, 1088 Discovery Avenue, Kelowna, BC, V1V 1V7, Canada

10 District of Clearwater, BC, Canada; and Department of Family Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 5950 University Boulevard, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada

11 Northern Medical Program, University of Northern BC, 3333 University Way, Prince George, BC, V2N 4Z9, Canada; and Department of Family Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 5950 University Boulevard, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada

PUBLISHED

10 September 2019 Volume 19 Issue 3

HISTORY

RECEIVED: 15 December 2018

REVISED: 13 June 2019

ACCEPTED: 1 July 2019

CITATION

Maurice S, Mytting K, Gentles JQ, Roots R, Constantin AG, Kruger SL, Sim S, Brock W, Oyedele O, Soles JA, Snadden D.  The Healthcare Travelling Roadshow: a qualitative study of a rural community engagement initiative in Canada. Rural and Remote Health 2019; 19: 5238. https://doi.org/10.22605/RRH5238

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONSgo to url

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence

go to urlCited by

Dr Sean Maurice: The healthcare travelling roadshow

download PDF


abstract:

Introduction:  Youth from rural communities face significant challenges in the pursuit of healthcare training. Healthcare trainees with a rural background are more likely than those without to practice rurally as healthcare professionals. The Healthcare Travelling Roadshow (HCTRS) is an initiative in Canada that provides rural youth with exposure to healthcare careers, while providing healthcare students with exposure to rural opportunities, and an interprofessional education experience. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first description of an initiative for rural university–high school healthcare career outreach that involves near-peer teaching, highly interactive sessions, and an interprofessional focus.
Methods:  Ten HCTRSs took place throughout northern rural and remote British Columbia between 2010 and 2017. Questionnaires were delivered to youth in a pilot research project in 2010. Healthcare students and community members completed questionnaires for ongoing program evaluation from 2010 to 2017. Quantitative elements were graded on a five-point Likert scale. Qualitative elements were analyzed thematically.
Results:  Participants indicated that the program was very successful (4.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.63–4.79), would likely encourage healthcare students to consider rural practice (4.12, 95%CI 3.98–4.26), and that it inspired local youth to consider careers in health care much or very much (4.45, 95%CI 4.35–4.55). Qualitative analysis led to description of four themes: (1) sincerity and interactivity sparking enthusiasm, (2) learning through rural exposure and community engagement, (3) healthcare student personal growth and (4) interprofessional collaboration and development. Open-ended feedback identified successes outside of the primary goals and illustrated how this program could act in a multi-faceted way to promote healthcare recruitment and retention. Constructive comments emphasized the importance of taking a balanced approach to planning the HCTRS, ensuring the goals of the HCTRS are best met, while meeting the needs of the host communities as much as possible.
Conclusions:  The HCTRS is an interdisciplinary experience that successfully engages rural youth, healthcare students, and community stakeholders. Participants consistently indicated that it encouraged rural youth towards healthcare careers and healthcare students towards rural practice. Success of the program requires meaningful engagement with multiple academic and community stakeholders.

Keywords:

Canada, community engagement, medical education, qualitative research, rural pipeline, university-high school outreach.

full article:

Introduction

There have long been geographic maldistributions of healthcare professionals, which contribute to the health disparities experienced by rural peoples worldwide1-4. This is particularly evident in countries such as Canada, where about 95% of the geography is rural5. While some 16.8% of the population of Canada lives in a rural environment, their health needs are served by only 8.2% of physicians6. This disparity is similarly observed in other countries and in other healthcare fields2. Current evidence suggests students with a rural origin and students trained in a rural context are more likely to consider rural health careers7-16 yet rural candidates are underrepresented at medical schools, most of which are urban based7,17. Efforts to deal with this maldistribution have led to the creation of a number of different models of distributed medical education, which collectively strive to increase the number of students training and practicing in rural locations18-20. Students of rural origin face many barriers not shared with their urban counterparts in attaining admission to healthcare training9,17. They are less likely to pursue post-secondary education and may be disproportionately underrepresented in health-related programs21. Rural youth are less likely to believe that they could gain admission to medical school and may also be relatively unaware of career options in health care, compared to their urban counterparts22.

Many different initiatives exist within the spectrum of rural healthcare pipeline programs23,24. University–high school outreach programs are at the earliest stage of the pipeline, and there remains a relative paucity of initiatives that visit youth in their rural communities9. Some of the initiatives described previously include a Mini-Med School program that focused on interactive stations delivered by experienced clinician educators25, a Mini-Med School focused on Indigenous youth, with interactive stations facilitated by medical students26, a rural secondary school outreach program with both lectures and interactive stations facilitated by medical students27, and a high school outreach for nursing student recruitment where practicing nurses, educators, and administrators provided information on opportunities at various different rural targeted venues12.

The Healthcare Travelling Roadshow (HCTRS) was conceived in 2009 at a rural healthcare workforce symposium held in Prince George, British Columbia (BC), in response to workforce shortages. Rural communities were to provide students with a rich learning context for understanding interprofessional collaboration and rural healthcare opportunities and challenges. The interprofessional healthcare student team was to engage local youth and provide education and encouragement towards healthcare training and careers. Each roadshow was to be customized to the communities and schools to be visited, striving to meet the needs of the region, and involve Indigenous students and healthcare providers wherever possible.

This article reports the outcomes of the program from 2010–2017. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first description of an initiative for rural university–high school healthcare career outreach that involves near-peer teaching, highly interactive sessions, and an interprofessional focus.

Methods

Study design and setting 

Since 2010, the HCTRS has occurred once or more annually in northern rural and remote BC communities (population ~500–20 000), with presentations at local high schools on different healthcare careers. A typical roadshow consisted of 7 days of travel, visiting three communities and conducting 10 high school presentations (Fig1). Presentations were delivered to all youth within a cohort (typically grade 10, depending on community size and needs). The goals were to:

  • showcase healthcare careers as options for rural students
  • showcase the rural community as a career option for healthcare students
  • provide an interdisciplinary experience for healthcare students.

This was to be accomplished through highly interactive presentations, and involve near-peer teaching28,29, using medical equipment similar to that used in everyday healthcare situations (Table 1). A collaborative model was conceived, requiring an academic champion to engage with the academic partners, and work closely with a community champion who engaged with the various community partners to identify the specific needs of the community and how best the HCTRS may be tailored to address those needs during the timeframe of the proposed roadshow and on an ongoing basis (Fig2).

The evaluation used data from both the 2010 pilot and ongoing program evaluation. Qualitative data were analysed using a thematic analysis approach, as described below30.

Table 1: Sample equipment inventory

Figure 1:  Summary of healthcare travelling roadshows 2010–2017. Dark bubbles indicate the year of the trip, the total distance travelled, and the communities visited. The years 2010 and 2012–2015 each had one annual trip, 2016 had two, and 2017 saw three annual trips, including the first trip based outside of Prince George.

Figure 2:  Elements of planning and ongoing engagement.

Sampling

Convenience sampling was utilized both during and immediately after each annual HCTRS trip. Three separate populations were targeted to ensure that the data obtained represented all parties involved. Students registered in healthcare career training programs in the province of BC, at any stage of training, were invited to apply to participate in the HCTRS. Participants were selected based on a combination of criteria including desire to inspire youth to consider healthcare careers, knowledge of or desire to learn about rural health care, and diversity of applicants (careers, training locations, gender, backgrounds). A preference was given to involving new healthcare students on each trip but a few students participated in more than one trip. Students were given minimal guidance on developing their presentations, and commonly the student presentations evolved throughout the trip. In 2010–2017, students were from 20 different healthcare training programs, located in small and large centers across the province (Table 2), with different combinations of careers represented on each trip. Typically, eight different healthcare careers were represented on each trip, and healthcare students were generally in their mid-20s, consistent with a near-peer teaching approach28,29. Key community members (teachers, administrators, hospital staff, town councillors, etc.) were identified based on previous interaction, and then invited, either by email or in person, to submit feedback on their experiences. Healthcare students were invited to provide feedback at the end of their week partaking in the HCTRS. Youth were also asked for feedback, facilitated by their school (2010 only). Participants in the study were youth (high school students; n=22), community members (n=62) and healthcare students (n=57).

Table 2:  Careers represented in the healthcare travelling roadshow (2010–2017)

Data collection

The questionnaires developed in the pilot study were designed for three separate populations (youth, community members, and healthcare students) and formed the basis for those used in ongoing program evaluation. The data presented are a composite of both pilot and ongoing program evaluation. Questionnaires contained both quantitative and qualitative elements. Respondents were asked to answer three quantitative questions each on a five-point Likert scale, with healthcare students answering an additional question. Two open-ended narrative questions asked respondents to articulate strengths of the HCTRS and areas for improvement. Data were collected using either paper or electronic forms. These data were transcribed into separate documents based on respondent type and question being asked. These documents were then transferred into NVivo v11 (QSR International; https://www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo/home) to facilitate the generation of codes and themes. Data collection occurred between 2010 and 2017, on 10 different trips, resulting in a total of 141 respondents between all three populations. Non-participation was not a concern and specific number of refusals to participate was not tracked.

Analysis

Quantitative data are shown with Likert scale averages and confidence intervals calculated using Microsoft Excel. Qualitative data were coded iteratively by three investigators (SBM, KM and JQG) in NVivo. These codes were then analyzed by a single author (KT) to ensure congruity and comprehensiveness. An inductive approach to coding was used, basing codes on the data and not on any existing framework30. Codes were generated simultaneously for all respondent types and were not separated based on this parameter. Themes were generated through a semantic approach to summarize the data without much interpretation30. Themes that emerged are based on collective data from all respondents across all years.

Ethics approval

A pilot study was conducted with youth in 2010, with both student assent and parental consent for youth to complete the questionnaire and be filmed for promotional film development. Ethics approval was granted by the University of British Columbia Research Ethics Board (protocol H10-01345) and the University of Northern British Columbia Research Ethics Board (protocol E2010.0520.089). Program evaluations were conducted with healthcare students and community members from 2010 to 2017, for the primary purpose of program improvement.

Results

Quantitative analysis

Youth, healthcare students, and community members consistently indicated that the HCTRS was successful or very successful (Table 3). When asked whether they thought this initiative would help encourage healthcare students to consider one day taking up practice in a rural community, youth and healthcare students thought this was likely or very likely, whereas the community members felt this was only somewhat likely to likely. Regarding whether the HCTRS achieved the aim of inspiring local youth to consider careers in health care, all groups felt the HCTRS did this very much. Healthcare students consistently rated the overall experience very highly.

Table 3:  Quantitative evaluation of the healthcare travelling roadshow. Average of responses to program evaluation questions, with 95% confidence intervals presented by population: youth (n=22), community members (n=62), healthcare students (n=57), and total (n=141 or n=57 total for question 4)

Qualitative analysis

Four major themes arose from the analysis: (1) sincerity and interactivity sparking enthusiasm, (2) learning through rural exposure and community engagement, (3) healthcare student personal growth, and (4) interprofessional collaboration and development. The first two themes arose across all three populations, while the last two arose only with the healthcare students. Quotes representing the variety of perspectives encompassed within each theme are shown in Table 4.

Table 4:  Highlights of program evaluation. Representative quotes organized by theme

Sincerity and interactivity sparking enthusiasm

This theme was the most prominent across all populations. Nearly all youth valued interactivity when asked their view of the best part of the HCTRS. Healthcare students often commented that they most enjoyed the enthusiasm they were able to elicit from students during the small group presentations. The most common key ideas within this theme included inspiring youth, mentoring through sharing stories, sincerity of the healthcare students, and enjoyment of the interactive stations. The community members also found the presentation of the diversity of healthcare career options to be powerful.

Learning through rural exposure and community engagement

Healthcare students as well as community members viewed rural exposure and community engagement as paramount in the impact of the HCTRS. Healthcare students from both smaller and larger centers often remarked on how the HCTRS opened their eyes to rural life and its benefits as well as its challenges. Some students were profoundly impacted by the resource scarcities in rural towns and how this was managed by the local healthcare teams. Community members often wrote about their positive interactions with the healthcare students during the HCTRS and specifically during tours of community healthcare facilities, when community leaders showcased their communities. Community members were optimistic that, by following such robust engagement with the community, students would be more likely to consider rural practice as a viable career option in the future.

Healthcare student personal growth

A less common but still prominent theme that arose was the personal growth of the healthcare students. This stands out as a major ancillary benefit of the HCTRS beyond achieving its three goals. Students articulated being inspired to be better people, gaining confidence in describing their career to others, and increasing their cultural competency. Personal growth came from the interprofessional interactions, high school presentations, and community exposure.

Interprofessional collaboration and development

The theme of interprofessionalism was unique to the healthcare students. Interprofessionalism was one of the most commonly occurring themes throughout the data, suggesting that the healthcare students regarded this as one of the most impactful aspects of the HCTRS. Students talked mostly about their interactions with the other healthcare students, and how the experience of learning with, from and about each other helped them to develop a better, more holistic understanding of interprofessionalism in health care.

The majority of constructive comments from all three populations were operational recommendations. However, these were largely contradictory. Some wanted larger presentations to include more students; others wanted smaller presentations for more engagement. Some wanted more time for interaction; others wanted more presentations to happen. These paradoxical ideas were represented across populations and illustrate the importance of taking a balanced approach to planning the HCTRS, ensuring the goals of the HCTRS are best met, while meeting the needs of the host communities as much as possible. Finding this balance requires thoughtful planning and communication on the part of the academic and community champions.

Discussion

The present data show that the HCTRS was uniformly well received and largely successful in achieving its goals. Participants mostly rated the success of different aspects of the initiative at greater than 4 out of 5. One notable exception was that community members felt it was only somewhat likely to likely that the HCTRS would encourage healthcare students to consider rural practice. The community members may have had a more realistic perspective, given their lived experience with the realities of rural healthcare recruitment and retention. It is also possible that they may not have understood the full scope of the HCTRS, as few community members were engaged in all aspects (school presentations, community tours, hospital tours, and social events). Additionally, community members may have had a more sceptical perspective than the healthcare students, who were typically two to three decades younger. Community involvement and ‘fit’ is important in rural recruitment for practitioners of both rural and urban background31. Younger healthcare practitioners have different career aspirations than their senior colleagues and working with these different aspirations contributes to success in recruitment and retention6. If community members believe it is unlikely that their youth will go into health care or that the HCTRS students are unlikely to choose rural practice, their attitudes could decrease the success of the initiative. As the HCTRS grows and engages community members in discussion about rural healthcare recruitment, a desirable outcome would be building community optimism about rural healthcare recruitment.

In the qualitative analysis, all three populations articulated that the HCTRS was successful in achieving the three goals set out by the program. Furthermore, all community respondents, when asked whether they hoped the roadshow would return to their community, responded in the affirmative, often emphatically. This illustrates how well the HCTRS was received by communities, and their belief that it may help to address rural healthcare shortages. In addition, through open-ended feedback, novel benefits outside of the three main goals were identified. These include personal growth for healthcare students and positive engagement with the community leaving a lasting impact on their understanding of rural health care. The interprofessional design was a high impact aspect of the HCTRS for the healthcare students. Interprofessional initiatives have many benefits for rural health care at the post-licensure level, including patient care cost savings, and recruitment and retention of healthcare professionals32. Whether interprofessional rural exposure at the trainee level is associated with long term rural recruitment and retention is not currently known32, but is an important area for future HCTRS research.

Constructive feedback illustrates the complexity of trying to meet the diverse needs of the stakeholders. Many details need to be negotiated in the planning of each trip, including number of presentations, presentation size and duration, target grade, nature or extent of community and healthcare facility tours. Meaningful community engagement is key in the planning and execution of the roadshow, as in other areas of rural health sciences education33. Community members shared how speaking to the healthcare students about their community, its strengths and needs, allowed them to showcase their community and shed light on the healthcare disparities specific to their community. Based on the community and academic champions’ suggestions to ensure success, the program needs to continue to tailor its implementation, and be flexible to best address the needs of the various stakeholders involved in each trip.

One of the most common ideas to emerge from the data was that of personal interaction, and the power therein. This was brought up in many different instances, which show how opening a narrative on rural health care between secondary school students, healthcare students, and communities can act to bring about a change in mindset that could see rural healthcare shortages lessen in the future. Secondary school students remarked on how hearing the stories of healthcare students gave them a better understanding of each career and brought realism to the intangible idea of pursuing healthcare in their future careers. Community members shared how speaking to the healthcare students about their community, its strengths and needs, allowed them to showcase their community and shed light on their specific healthcare disparities. Healthcare students spoke often about how amazing it was to share their stories with secondary school students as well as with each other; thereby giving them a framework for how to view themselves and their role within the healthcare team. The HCTRS has worked to open the narrative of healthcare disparities in rural communities, which may help to address this gap in the future.

Limitations

This article describes the evaluation of an innovation to address rural healthcare workforce shortages. The analysis summarizes participants’ impressions at the time of the HCTRS, but cannot infer success in improving rural healthcare workforce recruiting. Further study of the impact of the HCTRS over the long term is warranted.

Conclusions

The barriers to recruiting healthcare professionals to rural regions are multifaceted, thus effective strategies to address this issue must also be multifaceted2,12. Since 2010 the HCTRS has been visiting rural communities throughout BC, with the aim of exposing rural youth to healthcare career options and healthcare students to rural health care and communities. Feedback from key community members, healthcare students and secondary school students has been overwhelmingly positive, indicating that the HCTRS has been successful in achieving its goals. Suggestions for improvement demonstrate the need for taking a balanced approach and tailoring the program to each community. Open-ended feedback identified successes outside of the primary goals and illustrate how this program could act in a multi-faceted way to promote healthcare recruitment and retention. Through continual program improvement and widening recognition, the HCTRS will continue to grow into the future, while working to improve rural healthcare workforce recruitment and retention in rural BC.

Acknowledgements

The success of this program has been possible due to the generous support and collaboration of many parties, including the rural communities and schools, the health authorities, and the post-secondary institutions across the province. Thanks to Laura Widmer for creating the map in Figure 1.

references:

1 Blumenthal DS. Geographic imbalances of physician supply: an international comparison. Journal of Rural Health 1994; 10(2): 109-118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0361.1994.tb00217.x PMid:10134711
2 Geyman JP, Hart LG, Norris TE, Coombs JB, Lishner DM. Educating generalist physicians for rural practice: how are we doing? Journal of Rural Health 2000; 16(1): 56-80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0361.2000.tb00436.x PMid:10916315
3 Snadden D, Casiro O. Maldistribution of physicians in BC: what we are trying to do about it. British Columbia Medical Journal 2008; 50(7): 371-372.
4 Laven G, Wilkinson D. Rural doctors and rural backgrounds: how strong is the evidence? A systematic review. Australian Journal of Rural Health 2003; 11(6): 277-284. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1584.2003.00534.x PMid:14678410
5 Moazzami B. Strengthening rural Canada: fewer & older: population and demographic challenges across rural Canada. A Pan-Canadian report. 2015. Available: http://strengtheningruralcanada.ca/file/Fewer-Older-Population-and-Demographic-Challenges-Across-Rural-Canada.pdf (Accessed 24 August 2019).
6 Snadden D, Kunzli MA. Working hard but working differently: a qualitative study of the impact of generational change on rural health care. CMAJ Open 2017; 5(3): E710-E716. https://doi.org/10.9778/cmajo.20170075 PMid:28903976
7 Hensel J, Shandling M, Redelmeier D. Rural medical students at urban medical schools: too few and far between? Open Medicine 2007; 1(1): e13-e17.
8 Hughes S, Zweifler J, Schafer S, Smith MA, Athwal S, Blossom HJ. High school census tract information predicts practice in rural and minority communities. Journal of Rural Health 2005; 21(3): 228-232. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0361.2005.tb00087.x PMid:16092296
9 Rourke J. Strategies to increase the enrolment of students of rural origin in medical school: recommendations from the Society of Rural Physicians of Canada. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2005; 172(1): 62-65. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.1040879 PMid:15632407
10 Woloschuk W, Tarrant M. Does a rural educational experience influence students’ likelihood of rural practice? Impact of student background and gender. Medical Education 2002; 36(3): 241-247. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01143.x PMid:11879514
11 Hancock C, Steinbach A, Nesbitt TS, Adler SR, Auerswald CL. Why doctors choose small towns: a developmental model of rural physician recruitment and retention. Social Science & Medicine 2009; 69(9): 1368-1376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.08.002 PMid:19747755
12 Lauver LS, Swan BA, West MM, Zukowsky K, Powell M, Frisby T, et al. Kids into health careers: a rural initiative. The Journal of Rural Health 2011; 27(1): 114-121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0361.2010.00316.x PMid:21204978
13 Brooks RG, Walsh M, Mardon RE, Lewis M, Clawson A. The roles of nature and nurture in the recruitment and retention of primary care physicians in rural areas: a review of the literature. Academic Medicine 2002; 77(8): 790-798. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200208000-00008 PMid:12176692
14 Grobler L, Marais BJ, Mabunda S. Interventions for increasing the proportion of health professionals practising in rural and other underserved areas. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015; CD005314. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005314.pub3 PMid:26123126
15 Wilson NW, Couper ID, De Vries E, Reid S, Fish T, Marais BJ. A critical review of interventions to redress the inequitable distribution of healthcare professionals to rural and remote areas. Rural and Remote Health 2009; 9: 1060. Available: http://www.rrh.org.au/journal/article/1060 (Accessed 1 June 2018).
16 Eley D, Young L, Przybeck TR. Exploring the temperament and character traits of rural and urban doctors. Journal of Rural Health 2009; 25(1): 43-49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0361.2009.00197.x PMid:19166560
17 Tesson G, Curran V, Pong RW, Strasser R. Advances in rural medical education in three countries: Canada, the United States and Australia. Education for Health 2005; 18(3): 405-415. https://doi.org/10.1080/13576280500289728 PMid:16236588
18 Snadden D, Bates J. Expanding undergraduate medical education in British Columbia: a distributed campus model. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2005; 173(6): 589-590. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.050439 PMid:16157718
19 de Villiers M, van Schalkwyk S, Blitz J, Couper I, Moodley K, Talib Z, et al. Decentralised training for medical students: a scoping review. BMC Medical Education 2017; 17(1): 196. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-017-1050-9 PMid:29121923
20 Mlambo M, Dreyer A, Dube R, Mapukata N, Couper I, Cooke R. Transformation of medical education through Decentralised Training Platforms: a scoping review. Rural and Remote Health 2018; 18: 4337. Available: http://www.rrh.org.au/journal/article/4337 (Accessed 7 July 2018). https://doi.org/10.22605/RRH4337 PMid:29522688
21 Aird PE, Shadbolt NS, Blau EM. Recruiting rural students to medicine: when best to intervene to improve the odds? McMaster University Medical Journal 2007; 4(1): 17-19.
22 Whalen D, Harris C, Harty C, Greene A, Faour E, Thomson K, et al. Should I apply to medical school? High school students and barriers to application. Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine 2016; 21(2): 46-50.
23 Carson DB, Schoo A, Berggren P. The ‘rural pipeline’ and retention of rural health professionalsin Europe’s northern peripheries. Health Policy 2015; 119: 1550-1556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.08.001 PMid:26321193
24 Murray RB, Wronski I. When the tide goes out: health workforce in rural, remote and Indigenous communities. Medical Journal of Australia 2006; 185(1): 37-38.
25 Shaikh FM, Babar M, Cross KS. Mini-Med School: promoting awareness of medicine as a career for suburban and rural high-school students. ANZ Journal of Surgery 2013; 83(6): 481-486. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.2012.06288.x PMid:23107576
26 Henderson RI, Williams K, Crowshoe LL. Mini-Med School for Aboriginal youth: experiential science outreach to tackle systemic barriers. Medical Education Online 2015; 20(1). https://doi.org/10.3402/meo.v20.29561 PMid:26701840
27 Robinson MA, Douglas-Vail MB, Bryce JN, van Zyl TJ. Medical school outreach and mentorship for rural secondary school students: a pilot of the Southwestern Ontario Medical Mentorship Program. Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine 2017; 22(2): 62-67.
28 Benè KL, Bergus G. When learners become teachers: a review of peer teaching in medical student education. Family Medicine 2014; 46(10): 783-787.
29 Sonagara VJ, Santhirakumaran S, Kalkat HS. The value of near-peer teaching in the medical curriculum. Advances in Medical Education and Practice 2018; 9: 63-64. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S153240 PMid:29403327
30 Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 2006; 3(2): 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
31 Hancock C, Steinbach A, Nesbitt TS, Adler SR, Auerswald CL. Why doctors choose small towns: a developmental model of rural physician recruitment and retention. Social Science & Medicine 2009; 69(9): 1368-1376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.08.002 PMid:19747755
32 Suter E, Deutschlander S, Mickelson G, Nurani Z, Lait J, Harrison L, et al. Can interprofessional collaboration provide health human resources solutions? A knowledge synthesis. Journal of Interprofessional Care 2012; 26(4): 261-268. https://doi.org/10.3109/13561820.2012.663014 PMid:22390728
33 Strasser RP. Community engagement: a key to successful rural clinical education. Rural and Remote Health 2010; 10: 1543. Available: http://www.rrh.org.au/journal/article/1543 (Accessed 5 April 2018). https://doi.org/10.22605/RRH1543 PMid:20815653
This PDF has been produced for your convenience. Always refer to the live site https://www.rrh.org.au/journal/article/5238 for the Version of Record.