ArticleJB & JS open access
The Future of Rural Orthopaedic Practice: A Resident Survey Study.
Article in JB & JS open access. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Those who live in rural areas generally exhibit higher prevalence of musculoskeletal conditions than urban populations. Already limited access to local orthopaedic care is becoming more challenging, as orthopaedic surgeons in these areas tend to be older and nearing retirement, while few graduating residents are selecting rural practice. However, little data exist on why orthopaedic residents are not choosing rural practice despite the clear need. Methods: A 22-question survey was created in REDCap. A letter of invitation to participate was sent to interested program directors through the AOA Collaborative Orthopaedic Education Research Group (COERG). Questions included those related to community of origin, level of interest in rural practice, and areas in which more information is needed. Results: One hundred seven orthopaedic surgery residents from 16 programs completed the survey. Only 6 respondents plan to practice in rural areas. Thirty-two reported no interest in rural practice. Sixty-nine respondents were unsure about rural practice. No significant differences in rural interest were found based on gender or parental status. The only demographic factor impacting interest in rural practice was coming from a rural background. Factors leading to interest or disinterest in rural practice were similar. Those indicating that they were unsure wanted more information regarding impact on families, call, compensation, and case volume and complexity. Conclusion: Addressing the gap in rural orthopaedic care is complex, but there are opportunities such as outreach to rural students to encourage them to consider medicine and then orthopaedic surgery as a career, as well as education sessions and rotations during residency training to expand rural interest. Clinical Relevance: Understanding the factors that lead to orthopaedic residents pursuing (or not) practice in rural areas is important in addressing access to musculoskeletal care in these areas.
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.