ArticleTechnical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology2022
A phenomenological study investigating experiences of student learning using an online radiation therapy planning curriculum.
Article in Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Awareness and Understanding of Ionizing and Non-Ionizing Radiation Modalities Among Patients in Saudi Arabia.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
- Radiography students wishing to work in the field of radiation therapy: A French experience.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Scholarship in radiation oncology education.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Traditionally radiation therapy planning was taught on campus in planning labs, or in the case of fully online programs, during clinical placements. In 2017, an innovative online planning curriculum was developed using a structured, self-directed approach of online learning and assessment, supported by a cloud-based planning system. This study aimed to explore student experiences of learning and practising planning online, and the application of acquired knowledge and skills to clinical practice. Methods: Student experiences were investigated using an interpretive phenomenological method. A purposive sample of under-graduate and graduate entry students was recruited through email and snowballing. A combination of online individual and group interviews were conducted. Two researchers analysed the data, and used reflection, discussion and note taking processes to immerse themselves in the data. Following data collection, the process of organising data for analysis, applying a coding and condensing process to reduce the data into themes and sub-themes was conducted. Results: Seventeen students from three cohorts participated in the interviews. Five key themes were identified: Flexibility, Connectedness, Personal relevance, Professional Experts and Safe environment. Sub-component themes were also identified. Discussion: Student engagement was based on a range of factors that influence the student experience. The planning curriculum allowed students to develop confidence and competence in pre-clinical planning skills prior to placement. Conclusion: Although initial experiences were overwhelming, over time students experienced a sense of engagement with their learning when supported by clinical and academic experts. Students felt more prepared for clinical placement as a result of their experiences.
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.