Existing rurality categories cannot address the diverse socio-cultural, economic and environmental characteristics of non-metropolitan regions. While it has limitations, the dataset will enable a fine-grained examination of geographic, household and community factors and provide a unique longitudinal dataset over a five-year period.

The chief determinants of current well being were those reflecting individual level attributes and perceptions, rather than district-level rural characteristics. This has implications for strategies to promote well being within rural communities through enhancing community connectedness and combating social isolation in the face of major adversities such as drought.

ObjectiveTo determine the percentage of research projects funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council in the period 2000–2014 that aimed specifically to deliver health benefits to Australians living in rural and remote areas and to estimate the proportion of total funding this represented in 2005–2014.DesignThis is a retrospective analysis of publicly available datasets.SettingNational Health and Medical Research Council Rural and Remote Health Research 2000–2014.Outcome measures‘Australian Rural Health Research’ was defined as: research that focussed on rural or remote Australia; that related to the National Health and Medical Research Council's research categories other than Basic Science; and aimed specifically to improve the health of Australians living in rural and remote areas. Grants meeting the inclusion criteria were grouped according to the National Health and Medical Research Council's categories and potential benefit. Funding totals were aggregated and compared to the total funding and Indigenous funding for the period 2005–2014.ResultsOf the 16 651 National Health and Medical Research Council‐funded projects, 185 (1.1%) that commenced funding during the period 2000–2014 were defined as ‘Australian Rural Health Research’. The funding for Australian Rural Health Research increased from 1.0% of the total in 2005 to 2.4% in 2014. A summary of the funding according to the National Health and Medical Research Council's research categories and potential benefit is presented.ConclusionAddressing the health inequality experienced by rural and remote Australians is a stated aim of the Australian Government. While National Health and Medical Research Council funding for rural health research has increased over the past decade, at 2.4% by value, it appears very low given the extent of the health status and health service deficits faced by the 30% who live in rural Australia.

Recent research has demonstrated that longitudinal integrated placements (LICs) are an alternative mode of clinical education to traditional placements. Extended student engagement in community settings provide the advantages of educational continuity as well as increased service provision in underserved areas. Developing and maintaining LICs require a differing approach to student learning than that for traditional placements. There has been little theoretically informed empirical research that has offered explanations of which are the important factors that promote student learning in LICs and the relationships between those factors. We explored the relationship between student learning, student perceptions of preparedness for practice and student engagement, in the context of a rural LIC. We used a sequential qualitative design employing thematic, comparative and relational analysis of data from student interviews (n = 18) to understand possible processes and mechanisms of student learning in the LIC. Through the theoretical lens of social learning systems, we identified two major themes; connectivity and preparedness for practice. Connectivity described engagement and relationship building by students, across formal and informal learning experiences, interprofessional interactions, social interactions with colleagues, interaction with patients outside of the clinical setting, and the extent of -016-9740-3 integration in the wider community. Preparedness for practice, reflected students' perceptions of having sufficient depth in clinical skills, personal and professional development, cultural awareness and understanding of the health system, to work in that system. A comparative analysis compared the nature and variation of learning across students. In a relational analysis, there was a positive association between connectivity and preparedness for practice. Connectivity is a powerful enabler of students' agentic engagement, collaboration, and learning within an LIC. It is related to student perceptions of preparedness for practice. These findings provide insight for institutions wishing to develop similar programmes, by encouraging health professional educators to consider all of the potential elements of the placements, which most promote connectivity.Adv in Health Sci Educ (2017) 22:1011-1029 DOI 10.1007/s10459

In order to ensure relevance to policy and practice and to provide accountability for funding, it is essential that the impact of health services research is measured and monitored over time. Our framework draws upon previously published literature regarding specific measures of research impact. We organise this information according to the main area of impact (i.e. research related, policy, service and societal) and whether the impact originated with the researcher (i.e. producer push) or the end-user (i.e. user pull). We propose to test the utility of the framework by recording and monitoring the impact of our own research and that of other groups of primary health care researchers.

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12607000423415.

No abstract

This review article reports on the contribution of university Departments of Rural Health and Rural Clinical Schools to the development of rural health and the rural health workforce and is set at the Australian Government's university Departments of Rural Health and Rural Clinical Training and Support Programs. The main outcome measures include educational infrastructure, clinical academic workforce, student numbers, community engagement, research outputs, rural health and workforce outcomes. As a result, university Departments of Rural Health and Rural Clinical Schools have established a substantial geographical footprint covering most of the rural and remote populations and regions across Australia. They have a large distributed rural clinical academic workforce that exceeds 1300. Medical student numbers on long‐term placements have increased threefold from inception to 1200 annually. Allied health and nursing numbers doubled over 10 years to 4000 in 2013 and are projected to double again by 2018. In 2013, they published 363 peer‐reviewed papers – half of which specifically addressed rural and/or remote health issues. High levels of intention to practise rurally and uptake of rural and remote practice following exposure to rural training have been reported, especially for medicine. Thus, university Departments of Rural Health and Rural Clinical Schools constitute a national network of academic units that deliver academically enriched clinical education and training for medical, nursing and allied health students and fulfil an essential academic role for the health system in rural and remote Australia. Community engagement and accountability to region are hallmarks of the program. Early evidence of the uptake of rural and remote practice following exposure to rural training has set expectations for the Rural Health Multidisciplinary Training Program.