Figure 1
Process for developing rural training platform.
Figure 2
Rural Rotations for FMSTP in Maryland, Liberia 2018–2020.
Table 1
Family Medicine Residents’ Review of Academic Rotations in Rural Liberia.
| OB/GYN | PEDIATRICS | SURGERY | INTERNAL MEDICINE | COMMUNITY HEALTH | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Attending made the goals and learning objectives clear at the start of the rotation | 4.50 | 4.60 | 4.33 | 4.67 | 5 |
| The Attending communicated complex information in a way that was clear and understandable | 4.33 | 4.80 | 4.50 | 4.67 | 4 |
| The Attending allowed me to participate in clinical situations in a way that facilitated learning | 4.50 | 4.60 | 4.83 | 4.67 | 4 |
| The Attending was responsive to questions from residents | 4.67 | 4.80 | 4.83 | 4.67 | 5 |
| The Attending and staff in my program were interested in my residency education | 4.33 | 4.80 | 4.67 | 4.67 | 4 |
| The Attending and staff provided sufficient supervision | 4.50 | 4.20 | 4.50 | 4.33 | 4 |
| The Attending and staff provided sufficient instruction | 4.17 | 4.40 | 4.33 | 4.67 | 4 |
| The Attending effectively created an environment of scholarship and inquiry | 4.60 | 4.00 | 4.40 | 4.33 | 4 |
| This program provided an environment where residents could raise problems or concerns without fear of intimidation or retaliation | 4.00 | 4.40 | 4.00 | 4.33 | 4 |
| I am satisfied with this program’s process to deal confidentially with problems or concerns residents might have | 4.00 | 4.20 | 4.17 | 4.33 | 3 |
| I am satisfied with the opportunities this program provided for me to participate in research and/or scholarly activities | 4.17 | 4.20 | 3.83 | 4.33 | 4 |
| I learned new skills that will be valuable in my future clinical practice | 4.33 | 4.40 | 4.33 | 4.33 | 5 |
| I had sufficient opportunities to practice new skills during this rotation | 4.17 | 4.00 | 4.50 | 3.67 | 4 |
| I would recommend this rotation to fellow Residents | 4.17 | 4.60 | 4.50 | 4.00 | 5 |
[i] 1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neither agree nor disagree 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree.
N = 13 family medicine residents, completed a total of 24 rotation evaluations (2018–2020).
Table 2
Family Medicine Resident Evaluation on System Support in Rural Training Program.
| CATEGORY | 1 = POOR | 2 = FAIR | 3 = GOOD | 4 = EXCELLENT | AVERAGE SCORE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The quality of my housing arrangements | 0% | 25% | 58% | 17% | 2.92 |
| The quality of the food provided | 0% | 40% | 40% | 20% | 2.80 |
| Transportation | 0% | 9% | 45% | 45% | 3.36 |
| Level of financial support | 17% | 0% | 58% | 25% | 2.92 |
| Hospital response to safety | 33% | 33% | 33% | 0% | 2.00 |
| Quality of internet | 8% | 75% | 17% | 0% | 2.08 |
| Length of rotation | 0% | 25% | 58% | 17% | 2.92 |
| Opportunities for social interaction | 8% | 25% | 42% | 25% | 2.83 |
| Opportunities for professional interaction | 0% | 8% | 42% | 50% | 3.42 |
| Opportunities for training in HIV treatment and prevention | 0% | 0% | 50% | 50% | 3.50 |
| Clinical resources in the hospital unit(s) where I worked | 8% | 25% | 50% | 17% | 2.75 |
[i] N = 13 family medicine residents who rotated in Maryland County.
Figure 3
Maternal and Child Health Indicators in Maryland County, July 2015–June 2020.
Figure 4
HIV Performance Indicators at JJ Dossen Hospital and Pleebo Health Center, 2015–2020.