↓ Skip to main content

What factors influence the choice of urban or rural location for future practice of Nepalese medical students? A cross-sectional descriptive study

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
What factors influence the choice of urban or rural location for future practice of Nepalese medical students? A cross-sectional descriptive study
Published in
Human Resources for Health, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12960-015-0084-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bhim Prasad Sapkota, Archana Amatya

Abstract

Nepal is experiencing a public health issue similar to the rest of the world, i.e., the geographical maldistribution of physicians. Although there is some documentation about the reasons physicians elect to leave Nepal to work abroad, very little is known about the salient factors that influence the choice of an urban versus rural practice setting for those physicians who do not migrate. In recent years, around 1000 medical students became doctors within Nepal, but their distribution in rural locations is not adequate. The purpose of this study was to explore what factors influence the choice of urban or rural location for the future clinical practice of Nepalese medical students in the final year of their program METHODS: A cross-sectional descriptive study design was used for this study involving Nepalese medical students in their final year of study and currently doing an internship in a medical college. The sample consisted of 393 medical students from four medical colleges in Nepal that were selected randomly. An anonymous self-administered questionnaire was used for data collection. To determine the association with rural location choice for their future practice setting, a comparison was done that involved demographic, socio-economic, and educational factors. Data were entered in EpiData and analyzed by using SPSS version 16. Among the 393 respondents, two thirds were male (66.9%) and more than half were below 25 years of age. Almost all (93%) respondents were single and about two thirds (63.4%) were of Brahmin and Chhetri ethnic origin. About two thirds (64.1%) of the respondents were born in a rural setting, and 58.8% and 53.3% had a place of rearing and permanent address in a rural location, respectively. The predictors of future rural location choice for their clinical practice (based on the bivariate analysis) included: (a) Rural (versus urban) place of birth, place of rearing, and permanent address (b) Source of family income (service, business, and agriculture) (c) Occupation of father (service, business and agriculture) (d) Wealth ranking (higher, middle, and lower wealth rank) (e) Educational factors: location, type of secondary education, and type of higher secondary education CONCLUSION: For medical students who were soon to complete their studies, demographic and educational factors were found to be significant predictors for a rural location choice, as opposed to socio-economic factors. Our findings indicate that to ensure the rural retention of physicians, the government of Nepal should attract potential medical students from those who were reared and educated in a rural setting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 111 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Researcher 8 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 6%
Other 23 21%
Unknown 30 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 25%
Social Sciences 14 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 9%
Psychology 9 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 40 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 43. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 July 2022.
All research outputs
#966,241
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#66
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,326
of 294,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#1
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,334 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.