Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 358

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Systematic review of effective retention incentives for health workers in rural and remote areas: Towards evidence‐based policy

Buykx, Penny, Humphreys, John, Wakerman, John, Pashen, Dennis·2010·Australian Journal of Rural Health
DOI 10.1111/j.1440-1584.2010.01139.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: Poor retention of health workers is a significant problem in rural and remote areas, with negative consequences for both health services and patient care. Objective: This review aimed to synthesise the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of retention strategies for health workers in rural and remote areas, with a focus on those studies relevant to Australia. Design: A systematic review method was adopted. Six program evaluation articles, eight review articles and one grey literature report were identified that met study inclusion/exclusion criteria. Results: While a wide range of retention strategies have been introduced in various settings to reduce unnecessary staff turnover and increase length of stay, few have been rigorously evaluated. Little evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of any specific strategy is currently available, with the possible exception of health worker obligation. Multiple factors influence length of employment, indicating that a flexible, multifaceted response to improving workforce retention is required. Conclusions: This paper proposes a comprehensive rural and remote health workforce retention framework to address factors known to contribute to avoidable turnover. The six components of the framework relate to staffing, infrastructure, remuneration, workplace organisation, professional environment, and social, family and community support. In order to ensure their effectiveness, retention strategies should be rigorously evaluated using appropriate pre‐ and post‐intervention comparisons.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1440-1584.2010.01139.x

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 30 references

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing, 2008, Report on the Audit of the Health Workforce in Rural and Regional Australia
  2. Productivity Commission, 2005, Australia's Health Workforce, Research Report
  3. Humphreys J, 2007, Improving Primary Health Care Workforce Retention in Small Rural and Remote Communities – How Important Is Ongoing Education and Training
  4. 10.1111/j.1440-1584.2007.00900.x · doi:10.1111/j.1440-1584.2007.00900.x
  5. Hall DJ, 2007, Drivers of professional mobility in the Northern Territory: dental professionals, Rural and Remote Health, 7, 655
  6. World Health Organisation, 2009, Increasing Access to Health Workers in Remote and Rural Locations through Improved Retention, Background Paper
  7. Australian Medical Association, 2007, State and Territory Rural Workforce Programs and Initiatives
  8. Australian National Audit Office, 2009, Rural and Remote Health Workforce Capacity – the Contribution Made by Programs Administered by the Department of Health and Ageing, Audit Report No. 26 2008–2009
  9. Gibbon P, 2006, Review of the Rural Retention Program
  10. Humphreys J, 2010, Retention Strategies and Incentives for Health Workers in Rural and Remote Areas: What Works?
  11. 10.1071/PY08014 · doi:10.1071/py08014
  12. 10.1111/j.1748-0361.2003.tb00649.x · doi:10.1111/j.1748-0361.2003.tb00649.x
  13. 10.3200/HTPS.87.1.10-14 · doi:10.3200/htps.87.1.10-14
  14. Humphreys J, 2010, Improving Workforce Retention: Developing An Integrated Logic Model to Maximise Sustainability of Small Rural and Remote Health Care Services
  15. Felix HC, 2005, The Arkansas Southern Rural Access Program: strategies for improving health care in rural areas of the state, Journal of the Arkansas Medical Society, 101, 366
  16. 10.2105/AJPH.94.10.1723 · doi:10.2105/ajph.94.10.1723
  17. 10.1111/j.1440-1584.1998.tb00299.x · doi:10.1111/j.1440-1584.1998.tb00299.x
  18. 10.1046/j.1440-1584.1999.00213.x · doi:10.1046/j.1440-1584.1999.00213.x
  19. 10.1016/j.profnurs.2007.06.022 · doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2007.06.022
  20. 10.1111/j.1447-0349.2007.00511.x · doi:10.1111/j.1447-0349.2007.00511.x
  21. 10.1111/j.1440-1584.2005.00708.x · doi:10.1111/j.1440-1584.2005.00708.x
  22. Waldman J, 2006, Change your metrics: if you get what you measure, then measure what you want‐retention, Journal of Medical Practice Management, 22, 13

Cited by

See all 358

Metadata

Authors
Buykx, P., Humphreys, J., Wakerman, J., & Pashen, D.
Venue
Australian Journal of Rural Health
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-06
Volume
18
Issue
3
Pages
102-109
ISSN
  • 1038-5282 (ISSN-L)
  • 1440-1584
DOI
10.1111/j.1440-1584.2010.01139.x
OpenAlex
W1654017800
Cited by
358
References
30
FWCI
7.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 19 d)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Systematic review of effective retention incentives for health workers in rural and remote areas: Towards evidence‐based policy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1440-1584.2010.01139.x
The paper
Buykx, P., Humphreys, J., Wakerman, J., & Pashen, D. (2010). Systematic review of effective retention incentives for health workers in rural and remote areas: Towards evidence‐based policy. Australian Journal of Rural Health. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1584.2010.01139.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.