And "appropriate practice" would be in aggregate: "over time, how are our graduates serving (or not serving) or communities? What are the holes?"

And of course none of this would filter down to "punishment" at any individual level. Grads can go where they want. But if most of your graduates are leaving your defined community, it should be a measured KPI, and things should be adjusted.

I certainly don't have all (any?) of the answers :) But I think it would be important for medical schools to decide what their "community" is (for example, UofA serving NWT education/staffing needs, NOSM serving outside the GTA, etc.). They should be transparent with applicants/graduates.

To be clear, the onus would be on med schools but mostly so that their partners (health authorities, ministries, etc.) are incentivized to help them out. They certainly cannot be expected to achieve these outcomes alone. 4/4

To further emphasize the point, CFPC and RC should include HHR outcomes as core reqs to maintain accreditation. What's the point of a medical school that trains the wrong kind of docs, or trains docs who leave? 3/4

The question for med schools shouldn't be "how well are we preparing doctors for practice?", it should be "how many well-trained doctors are working 5 years out in the communities we serve?" Would align schools, the public, and MoHs 2/4