Objective To investigate students' perceptions of the impact of coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2 on rural and remote placements facilitated by 16 University Departments of Rural Health in Australia in 2020. Design A mixed‐method design comprising an online survey and semi‐structured interviews. Setting Australia. Participants Allied health, nursing and medical students with a planned University Departments of Rural Health‐facilitated rural or remote placement between February and October 2020. Intervention A planned rural or remote placement in 2020 facilitated by a University Departments of Rural Health, regardless of placement outcome. Main outcome measures Questionnaire included placement outcome (completed or not), discipline of study (nursing, allied health, medicine), and Likert measures of impact to placement (including supervision, placement tasks, location, accommodation, client contact and student learning) and placement experience (overall, support, supervision, university support). Semi‐structured interviews asked about placement planning, outcome, decisions, experience and student perceptions. Results While coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2 reportedly impacted on the majority of planned placements, most students (80%) were able to complete their University Departments of Rural Health‐facilitated placement in some form and were satisfied with their placement experience. Common placement changes included changes to tasks, setting, supervisors and location. Allied health students were significantly more likely to indicate that their placement had been impacted and also felt more supported by supervisors and universities than nursing students. Interview participants expressed concerns regarding the potential impact of cancelled and adapted placements on graduation and future employment. Conclusions The coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic was reported to impact the majority of University Departments of Rural Health‐facilitated rural and remote placements in 2020. Fortunately, most students were able to continue to undertake a rural or remote placement in some form and were largely satisfied with their placement experience. Students were concerned about their lack of clinical learning and graduating on time with adequate clinical competence.

The purpose of this paper is to report the prevalence of speech and/or language impairment in a sample of preparatory students in northern Tasmania, Australia. A total of 308 preparatory students attending 30 public schools in northern Tasmania were administered assessments by a speech-language pathologist, and subsequently diagnosed with either typical or impaired speech and/or language skills. Overall, 41.2% of assessed preparatory students were identified as having either speech and/or language impairment. Specifically, 8.7% of students were found to have isolated speech impairment, 18.2% were diagnosed with isolated language impairment, and 14.3% were identified as having comorbid speech and language impairment. Compared to prior Australian and international research, the present data reflect one of the highest prevalence estimates for speech and/or language impairment reported to date. Given the relative paucity of Australian prevalence data, further epidemiological research specifically of Australian children is needed to validate the current findings.

Objective: To investigate the ophthalmology workforce distribution and location stability using Modified Monash Model category of remoteness. Methods: Whole of ophthalmologist workforce analysis using Australian Health Practitioner Registration Agency (AHPRA) data. Modified Monash Model (MMM) category was mapped to postcode of primary work location over a six-year period (2014 to 2019). MMM stability was investigated using survival analysis and competing risks regression. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Australia. Participants: Ophthalmologists registered with AHPRA. Main outcome measures: Retention within MMM category of primary work location. Results: A total of 948 ophthalmologists were identified (767 males, 181 females). Survival estimates indicate 84% of ophthalmologists remained working in MMM1, while 79% of ophthalmologists working in MMM2–MMM7remained in these regions during the six-year period. Conclusion: The Australian ophthalmology workforce shows a high level of location stability and is concentrated in metropolitan areas of Australia. Investment in policy initiatives designed to train, recruit and retain ophthalmologists in regional, rural and remote areas is needed to improve workforce distribution outside of metropolitan areas.

The purpose of this paper was to profile the extent and accuracy of teacher identification of speech and language impairment within a kindergarten student population in Tasmania, Australia, using the Kindergarten Development Check (KDC). A total of 286 kindergarten students (aged 4-5 years and in their first year of formal schooling) were screened by teachers with the KDC on two separate occasions over their kindergarten year. In the following academic year, each of the same 286 students were assessed by a speech-language pathologist, and diagnosed with either typically developing or impaired speech and/or language skills. Review of KDC data determined the number of students identified by teachers with speech and language impairment at each occasion during their kindergarten year. Comparison of data from the later KDC administration and speech-language pathology assessment then determined the correspondence between identification of speech and language impairment by teachers and speech-language pathologists. Upon initial administration of the KDC, 51 (17.8%) students were identified by teachers with language impairment and 47 (16.4%) students with speech impairment. Following the second administration of the KDC 3 months later, 20 (7.0%) students continued to be identified with language impairment, and 39 (13.6%) with speech impairment. Comparison of speech-language pathology testing results and KDC data from the second administration found the overall validity of teacher identification was 86.4% and 71% for speech and language impairment respectively. Specificity rates were high, with 93% and 97% of students with typically developing speech and language skills respectively, correctly classified on the KDC. However, the sensitivity was only 50% for speech impairment and 15% for language impairment, indicating that 50% of students presenting with speech impairment and 85% of students with language impairment in their subsequent academic year were not recorded by teachers as having such a difficulty on the later KDC administration during their kindergarten year. The KDC appears to be ineffective in supporting kindergarten teachers to identify students with ongoing speech and to a greater extent, language impairment. Measures to improve the sensitivity of the KDC in particular need to be considered by speech-language pathologists and educational professionals in Tasmania.