Objective This paper describes the service distribution and models of rural outreach by specialist doctors living in metropolitan or rural locations. Methods The present study was a national cross-sectional study of 902 specialist doctors providing 1401 rural outreach services in the Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life study, 2008. Five mutually exclusive models of rural outreach were studied. Results Nearly half of the outreach services (585/1401; 42%) were provided to outer regional or remote locations, most (58%) by metropolitan specialists. The most common model of outreach was drive-in, drive-out (379/902; 42%). In comparison, metropolitan-based specialists were less likely to provide hub-and-spoke models of service (odd ratio (OR) 0.31; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21-0.46) and more likely to provide fly-in, fly-out models of service (OR 4.15; 95% CI 2.32-7.42). The distance travelled by metropolitan specialists was not affected by working in the public or private sector. However, rural-based specialists were more likely to provide services to nearby towns if they worked privately. Conclusions Service distribution and models of outreach vary according to where specialists live as well as the practice sector of rural specialists. Multilevel policy and planning is needed to manage the risks and benefits of different service patterns by metropolitan and rural specialists so as to promote integrated and accessible services. What is known about this topic? There are numerous case studies describing outreach by specialist doctors. However, there is no systematic evidence describing the distribution of rural outreach services and models of outreach by specialists living in different locations and the broad-level factors that affect this. What does this paper add? The present study provides the first description of outreach service distribution and models of rural outreach by specialist doctors living in rural versus metropolitan areas. It shows that metropolitan and rural-based specialists have different levels of service reach and provide outreach through different models. Further, the paper highlights that practice sector has no effect on metropolitan specialists, but private rural specialists limit their travel distance. What are the implications for practitioners? The complexity of these patterns highlights the need for multilevel policy and planning approaches to promote integrated and accessible outreach in rural and remote Australia.