ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2021
Non-oncologist Physician Knowledge of Radiation Therapy at an Urban Community Hospital.
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 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improving Medical Education in Oncology: Enhancing Students' Understanding of Cancer Treatments Through Multidisciplinary Clinical Rotations.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitude, and practice toward advanced precision radiotherapy among patients with head and neck cancer.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radiation therapy (RT) is a crucial part of cancer care, but previous work suggests that many non-radiation oncologist physicians are uncomfortable referring for RT. To evaluate training and understanding of RT, the authors sent invitations to complete an online questionnaire to all physicians at a community hospital in Bronx, NY, which asked about oncology training and self-rated and objective knowledge of RT. Out of 247 invited participants, 87 responded (35%). Among responders, 19 were attending physicians (22%) and 66 (76%) were residents. Seventy-two percent of respondents reported caring for > 5 cancer patients in the past month, but 54% reported never referring patients for RT. Sixty-nine percent of respondents stated they received no radiation oncology training in medical school, and 36% reported no general oncology training. Approximately half believed themselves to be "somewhat knowledgeable" about RT indications (48%), benefits (53%), and side effects (55%). Objective assessment mean score was 6.2/12 (median 7) for all respondents; Respondents with internal medicine specialization scored higher than others (mean 7.7 vs 3.5; p < 0.01). Scores did not differ between attending and resident physicians, resident post-graduate levels, or receiving oncology training in medical school. The factors most commonly cited as affecting RT referral decisions were type of cancer, patient wishes, family wishes, poor functional status, and life expectancy. Many physicians are unaware of RT effectiveness or indications, which may affect referral patterns. Previous oncology training was not associated with higher knowledge scores.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.