ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2023
A Reflection on the Tensions of Acting in Dual Roles of Doctoral Researcher and Practitioner when Evaluating a Lifestyle Intervention for Breast Cancer Patients.
Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This reflection was completed as part of a doctoral project to develop and trial a lifestyle intervention for people following the completion of their treatment for breast cancer. In this study the graduate student acted in the dual roles of nutrition practitioner and researcher. This article uses the experience, reflection, action (ERA) cycle of reflection to consider some of the tensions faced due to the divergent priorities and requirements of these two roles. One challenge occurred during study recruitment when a few potential participants did not meet the inclusion criteria for the study but still wished to attend the intervention sessions. It was also a challenge to mitigate the risks of distress of potentially vulnerable participants during group intervention sessions. In both instances there was a potential conflict between the needs of patients and research requirements. This reflection concluded that the obligations of both roles should be adhered to where possible, but if in doubt, the needs of the participants were paramount.
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.