Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19160251›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2009

Interventions for increasing the proportion of health professionals practising in rural and other underserved areas.

Liesl Grobler, Ben J Marais, S A Mabunda, P N Marindi, Helmuth Reuter, Jimmy Volmink

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 91 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
91citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

91 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

31 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Liesl GroblerInstitute of Infectious Disease and Molecular Medicine (IIDMM), University of Cape Town, Faculty of Health Sciences, Anzio Road, Observatory, Western Province, South Africa, 7925. liesl.grobler@uct.ac.za
Ben J Marais
S A Mabunda
P N Marindi
Helmuth Reuter
Jimmy Volmink

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe inequitable distribution of health professionals, within and between countries, poses an important obstacle to the achievement of optimal attainable health for all.

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of interventions aimed at increasing the proportion of health professionals working in rural and other underserved areas. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the specialised register of the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (up to July 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (up to July 2007), MEDLINE (1966 to July 2007), EMBASE (1988 to July 2007), CINAHL (1982 to July 2007) and LILACS (up to July 2007). We also searched reference lists of all papers and relevant reviews identified, and contacted authors of relevant papers regarding any further published or unpublished work. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, controlled trials (not strictly randomised), controlled before-after studies and interrupted time series studies evaluating the effects of various interventions (e.g. educational, financial or regulatory strategies) on the recruitment and/or retention of health professionals in under-served areas. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts obtained from the search in order to identify potentially relevant studies. MAIN

resultsNo studies met the inclusion criteria. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere are no studies in which bias and confounding are minimised to support any of the interventions that have been implemented to address the inequitable distribution of health care professionals. Well-designed studies are needed to confirm or refute findings of various observational studies regarding educational, financial, regulatory and supportive interventions that may influence health care professionals' choice to practice in underserved areas. Governments and educators should ensure that where interventions are implemented this is done within the context of a well-planned study so that the true effects of these measures on recruitment and long term retention can be determined in various settings.

Indexed as

Health WorkforceMedically Underserved AreaRural HealthHumans

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.