Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39075475›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2024

A retrospective descriptive review of community-engaged research projects addressing rural health priorities.

Bushra Farah Nasir, Bruce Chater, Matthew McGrail, Srinivas Kondalsamy-Chennakesavan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Bushra Farah NasirMayne Academy of Rural and Remote Medicine, Rural and Remote Medicine Clinical Unit, Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Theodore 4719, QLD, Australia. b.nasir@uq.edu.au.
Bruce ChaterMayne Academy of Rural and Remote Medicine, Rural and Remote Medicine Clinical Unit, Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Theodore 4719, QLD, Australia.
Matthew McGrailRockhampton Regional Clinical Unit Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Rockhampton 4700, QLD, Australia.
Srinivas Kondalsamy-ChennakesavanToowoomba Regional Clinical Unit, Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland Toowoomba, 6 Range Street, Mount Lofty, Toowoomba, QLD, 4350, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost rural populations experience significant health disadvantage. Community-engaged research can facilitate research activities towards addressing health issues of priority to local communities. Connecting scholars with community based frontline practices that are addressing local health and medical needs helps establish a robust pipeline for research that can inform gaps in health provision. Rural Health Projects (RHPs) are conducted as part of the Doctor of Medicine program at the University of Queensland. This study aims to describe the geographic coverage of RHPs, the health topic areas covered and the different types of RHP research activities conducted. It also provides meaningful insight of the health priorities for local rural communities in Queensland, Australia.

methodsThis study conducted a retrospective review of RHPs conducted between 2011 and 2021 in rural and remote Australian communities. Descriptive analyses were used to describe RHP locations by their geographical classification and disease/research categorisation using the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems - 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes and the Human Research Classification System (HRCS) categories.

resultsThere were a total of 2806 eligible RHPs conducted between 2011 and 2021, predominantly in Queensland (n = 2728, 97·2%). These were mostly conducted in small rural towns (under 5,000 population, n = 1044, 37·2%) or other rural towns up to 15,000 population (n = 842, 30·0%). Projects mostly addressed individual care needs (n = 1233, 43·9%) according to HRCS categories, or were related to factors influencing health status and contact with health services (n = 1012, 36·1%) according to ICD-10 classification.

conclusionsConducting community focused RHPs demonstrates a valuable method to address community-specific rural health priorities by engaging medical students in research projects while simultaneously enhancing their research skills.

Indexed as

Health PrioritiesCommunity-Based Participatory ResearchHumansQueenslandRetrospective StudiesRural HealthRural Health ServicesRural PopulationCommunity engagementMedical educationRural healthRural medicine

Identifiers

PMID39075475
PMCPMC11285408

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.