Data Sources
The data published on the Medi-Nav website is collated from a number of external and internal sources. The following table outlines the data sources and definitions:
| Name of publication | Source of publication | Link to source data | Medi-Nav data points | Data definition | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Specialists | |||||
| National Health Workforce Dataset 2018 | Australian Department of Health | Data Source | Number of specialists - QLD | Total number of registered specialists in QLD 2018 | |
| Number of specialists - Australia | Total number of registered specialists in Australia 2018 | ||||
| % male/female | Proportions of female and male specialists in QLD 2018 | ||||
| Average age | Average age of QLD specialists 2018 | ||||
| Average weekly hours | Average number of hours worked by QLD specialists in one week 2018 | ||||
| % over 60 years of age | Proportion of QLD specialists aged 60 or over 2018 | ||||
| % intend to retire in 10 years | Proportion of 2018 QLD specialists who indicated an intention to retire by 2028 | ||||
| Location | Proportions of QLD specialists practicing in major cities or regionally 2018 | ||||
| % private and public | Proportion of QLD specialists practising in private and public 2018 | ||||
| Medical Education and Training (MET) Report 2018 | Australian Department of Health | Data Source | Number of new fellows - QLD | Total number of Fellows admitted in 2018 - QLD | |
| Number of new fellows - Australia | Total number of Fellows admitted in 2018 - Australia | ||||
| Trainees | |||||
| Medical Education and Training (MET) Report 2018 and specialist medical colleges | Australian Department of Health, medical specialist colleges | Data Source | Number of trainees - Australia | Number of accredited trainees within specialty/sub-specialty across Australia as at 2018 | |
| Number of trainees - QLD | Number of accredited trainees within specialty/sub-specialty in QLD as at 2018 | ||||
| Proportion male/female | Proportions of QLD female and male advanced trainees within specialty/sub-specialty in 2018 | ||||
| Number of new trainees - Australia | Number of medical practitioners accepted onto an accredited training program in Australia in 2018 | ||||
| Number of new trainees - QLD | Number of medical practitioners accepted onto an accredited training program in QLD in 2018 | ||||
| Trainee Trends | Number of accredited trainees in Queensland 2013-2018 | ||||
| 2019 Resident Medical Officer & Registrar recruitment campaign | Queensland Health | Data Source | PGY new trainees - QLD | Postgraduate year in which the majority of trainees were selected to commence specialty training in QLD in 2019 | |
Data caveats:
The data published on the Medi-Nav website is collated from various data sources from 2018 to 2020 and is correct at the time of publication.
The National Health Workforce Dataset (2018) is a combination of annual registration data and voluntary workforce survey conducted by the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra).
The response rate for the voluntary workforce survey by the specialist workforce is >90%
Specialist data is sourced from the workforce survey where practitioners self-nominate the specialty in which they primarily practice (as such the data does not reflect practitioners with dual qualification).
Specialist data for General Practice is a combination of practitioners with ACRRM and RACGP Fellowship qualifications.
Trainee data for sub-specialties which was not available in the Medical Education and Training (MET) report has been sourced from the respective medical specialist colleges.
Trainee data predominately represents advanced trainees, however basic trainees are included in the total where data is available (specialties including basic trainees: anaesthetics, pain medicine, dermatology, emergency medicine, paediatric medicine, obstetrics and gynaecology, ophthalmology)
Trainee gender proportions represent advanced trainees only.
The source of data for gender proportions reflects a binary gender framework and we acknowledge that these options are not necessarily reflective of the gender diversity of the medical workforce.