Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40630484›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025

Twenty-five years of Alabama's Rural Health Leaders Pipeline: what difference has it made?

John R Wheat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. 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

1 author.

John R WheatDepartment of Family, Internal and Rural Medicine, College of Community Health Sciences, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: This community case report describes the Alabama Rural Health Leaders Pipeline operated as a demonstration research project, 1993-2017, tests of its effectiveness, and supportive studies. The purpose was to demonstrate production of physicians for Alabama's diverse rural population. The community-centric conceptual model was operationalized as two precollege summer pipeline programs and a master's in rural community health/rural medicine track that engaged 1,045 rural Alabama students over 25 years: 651 Rural Health Scholars after 11th grade, 174 Rural Minority Health Scholars after the 12th, and 220 Rural Medical Scholars in the combined MS/MD track. Rural students, rural community-based instruction, family medicine instructors, and community engagement were key components. Method: Review of Rural Health Leaders Pipeline publications. Four papers evaluated medical student academic performance, specialty choice, geographic location of practice, and production of other health professionals. Sixteen explored (a) factors associated with limited physician distribution in the Black Belt and (b) circumstances that engaged institutional and community collaborators in program development. Findings: Compared to peers in traditional medical education, rural medical track alumni more frequently chose family medicine specialty ( Discussion: The demonstration proved successful across much of rural Alabama, gained continuing state funding, and was institutionalized and expanded in the University of Alabama System. Further expansion is required to meet rural needs. Limited impact in the Black Belt remains a challenge for rural medical education and provides opportunities for future research.

Indexed as

cultural dissonanceeducational modelevaluation researchmedical educationminority populationspipelinerural physicians

Identifiers

PMID40630484
PMCPMC12234472

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.