Skip to main content

Table 4 Total number and per capita densities of all internal medicine subspecialties and surgical specialties in rural and urban areas between 2001–2008 and 2009–2020

From: The impact of incentive scheme on rural healthcare workforce availability: a case study of Kazakhstan

Comparisons between rural and urban physicians

Mean numbers (± SD*)

Mean per capita densities (± SD)

 

2001–2008

2009–2020

2001–2008

2009–2020

All internal medicine subspecialties

Rural

1923.38 (± 110.45)

2623.67 (± 588.22)

2.725 (± 0.27)

3.425 (± 0.72)

Urban

10692 (± 514.55)

15914.67 (± 4908.63)

12.463 (± 0.54)

15.867 (± 3.73)

Student’s t test, p value

0.027

 < 0.001

0.307

 < 0.001

Difference in differences

β = 700.292, p = 0.579

β = 0.700, p = 0.473

All surgical specialties

Rural

658.13 (± 88.84)

1128.17 (± 192.45)

0.988 (± 0.08)

1.483 (± 0.24)

Urban

5657.38 (± 387.09)

8085.50 (± 2195.90)

6.638 (± 0.43)

8.083 (± 1.59)

Student’s t test, p value

0.003

 < 0.001

 < 0.001

 < 0.001

Difference in differences

β = 470.042, p = 0.408

β = 0.496, p = 0.241

  1. *SD standard deviation