Background: Extreme weather events affect health by directly and indirectly increasing illness burdens and changing healthcare usage patterns. These effects can be especially severe in rural and remote areas, exacerbating existing health disparities, and necessitating urgent mitigation or adaptation strategies. Despite increased research on health and climate change, studies focusing on rural and remote populations remain limited. This study aimed to review the relationships among extreme weather events, healthcare utilization, and health outcomes in rural and remote populations, identify research gaps, and inform policy development for adaptation and disaster management in these settings. Methods: A systematic scoping review was registered and conducted following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The search databases included PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, ProQuest, and the WHO IRIS. The included studies were primary research, focused on rural or remote areas, and investigated the effects of extreme weather events on either health outcomes or healthcare utilization. There were no methodological, date or language restrictions. We excluded protocols, reviews, letters, editorials, and commentaries. Two reviewers screened and extracted all data, other reviewers were invited to resolve conflicts. Findings are presented numerically or narratively as appropriate. Results: The review included 135 studies from 31 countries, with most from high-income countries. Extreme weather events exacerbate communicable and noncommunicable diseases, including cardiorespiratory, mental health, and malnutrition, and lead to secondary impacts such as mass migration and increased poverty. Healthcare utilization patterns changed during these events, with increased demand for emergency services but reduced access to routine care due to disrupted services and financial constraints. Conclusions: The results highlighted the essential role of community and social support in rural and remote areas during extreme weather events and the importance of primary healthcare services in disaster management. Future research should focus on developing and implementing effective mitigation and adaptation programs tailored to the unique challenges faced by these populations.

Background Village doctors, as gatekeepers of the health system for rural residents in China, are often confronted with adversity in providing the basic public healthcare services. Objective We sought to summarize the training contents, training method, training location, and training costs most preferred by village doctors in China and hope to provide evidence and support for the government to deliver better training in the future. Methods Eight databases were searched to include studies that reported on the training needs of village doctors in China. We undertook a systematic review and a narrative synthesis of data. Results A total of 38 cross-sectional studies including 35,545 participants were included. In China, village doctors have extensive training needs. “Clinical knowledge and skill” and “diagnosis and treatment of common disease” were the most preferred training content; “continuing medical education” was the most preferred delivery method; above county- and county-level hospitals were the most desirable training locations, and the training costs were expected to be low or even free. Conclusion Village doctors in various regions of China have similar preferences for training. Thus, future training should focus more on the training needs and preferences of village doctors.

Background: Current literature systematically reports that interventions to attract and retain health workers in underserved areas need to be context specific but rarely defines what that means. In this systematic review, we try to summarize and analyse context factors influencing the implementation of interventions to attract and retain rural health workers. Methods: We searched online databases, relevant websites and reference lists of selected literature to identify studies on compulsory rural service programmes and financial incentives. Forty studies were selected. Information regarding context factors at macro, meso and micro levels was extracted and synthesized. Results: Macro-level context factors include political, economic and social factors. Meso-level factors include health system factors such as maldistribution of health workers, growing private sector, decentralization and health financing. Micro-level factors refer to the policy implementation process including funding sources, administrative agency, legislation process, monitoring and evaluation. Conclusions: Macro-, meso- and micro-level context factors can play different roles in agenda setting, policy formulation and implementation of health interventions to attract and retain rural health workers. These factors should be systematically considered in the different stages of policy process and evaluation.