Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31410821›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2021

Small Private Online Course in Teaching Oncology-Feedback After 1 Year: What Lessons?

Charlotte Vaysse, Anne-Laure Fize, Fabien Despas, Elodie Chantalat, Elie Serrano, Odile Beyne-Rauzy, Marie-Eve Rougé-Bugat

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Technology-Enhanced Learning in the Education of Oncology Medical Professionals: A Systematic Literature Review.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Charlotte VaysseSurgery Oncology Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Toulouse, Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse-Oncopole, Toulouse, France. vaysse.charlotte@iuct-oncopole.fr.ORCID 0000-0002-2374-5879
Anne-Laure FizePHUC CAPTOR WP4 Research Program, Université Paul Sabatier Toulouse III, Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse - Oncopole, Toulouse, France.
Fabien DespasUniversité Paul Sabatier Toulouse III, Toulouse, France.
Elodie ChantalatSurgery Oncology Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Toulouse, Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse-Oncopole, Toulouse, France.
Elie SerranoUniversité Paul Sabatier Toulouse III, Toulouse, France.
Odile Beyne-RauzyUniversité Paul Sabatier Toulouse III, Toulouse, France.
Marie-Eve Rougé-BugatUniversité Paul Sabatier Toulouse III, Toulouse, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In response to the complexity of medical care in oncology, 2 years ago, we designed a new teaching method (SPOC, Small Private Online Course) to improve cancer treatment and its management by emphasizing the community-hospital interface. The educational objective of this study was to evaluate after 1 year if the interest for this teaching remained constant over the long term to meet both educational and financial requirements. We designed a questionnaire including 18 questions grouped in 3 main parts describing the profile of the participants, his/her own experience, and the current utilization of the SPOC. Of 1574 participants of the 2 first sessions, 182 (11.5%) completed the questionnaire after 1 year. The majority of respondents were between the ages of 31 and 60 and belonged to a paramedical group (47.81%). After 1 year, 84.6% participants were satisfied or very satisfied with the content of the SPOC, 83.6% would recommended it, and 67% would be interested in using an updated SPOC again. Only 4.9% kept some contacts with other participants and 4.9% with teachers. 31.3% considered that the SPOC had a medium impact on their professional activity, 33.5% a lot, and 2.7% completely whereas 24.7% considered that it had little impact. The evaluation at 1 year showed that this digital learning method had a global positive impact on the professional practice of the participants. This study highlighted the empowerment of participants after this kind of teaching, but the network between participants was not enhanced.

Indexed as

Medical OncologyTeachingAdultFeedbackFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedFeedbackOncologySPOCTeaching

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.