ArticlePloS one2026
Engagement in research capability-building: Impact on healthcare workforce attraction and retention in rural and remote Australia - A scoping review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A scoping review of research capability building: impact on health workforce attraction and retention in rural and remote Australia.Human resources for health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGeographic maldistribution of the health workforce remains a major challenge in Australia, with rural and remote communities experiencing persistent shortages that undermine access to and quality of care. Engagement in research is recognised as a potential mechanism for professional growth, continued learning, and improved workplace environments. Providing opportunities for health workers to participate in research or research capability-building (RCB) may therefore support workforce outcomes such as attraction and retention. This scoping review will identify and map existing evidence on the relationship between research engagement and health workforce outcomes in rural and remote Australia, and to summarise the factors that contribute to successful implementation of such initiatives. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a scoping review of published and grey literature from Australia (2000 to present). Searches will be undertaken in CINAHL (EBSCO), Embase (Ovid), Global Health (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), and PubMed, following the PRISMA-ScR 2020 guidelines and the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. Additional searches will be conducted through Google, Google Scholar, organisational websites, and snowballing of reference lists from included studies. Search terms will address four core concepts: (i) health professionals; (ii) research and RCB; (iii) workforce outcomes; and (iv) rural and remote Australian settings. Both qualitative and quantitative evidence will be included. Data will be synthesised using descriptive and thematic analysis, combining deductive approaches informed by the socioecological model and inductive approaches. Subgroup analyses will be undertaken where appropriate to provide deeper insights into the findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This scoping review will not involve human participants or primary data collection and does not require ethical approval. The results of this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.