ArticleJournal of medical education and curricular development
Importance of Incorporating the Perspectives of People with Cancer into Oncology Education: A Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of medical education and curricular development. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Medical Student-Perceived Barriers, Facilitators, and Considerations Regarding Clinical Empathy Training: A Qualitative Study.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
- Community-Partnered Training in Trauma-Informed Primary Care for Patients Experiencing Reentry From Incarceration: A Pilot Training Study.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: With the shift towards person-centered care (PCC) in oncology, there is a need for parallel evolution of oncology education programs to prepare the next generation of health professionals to deliver effective PCC. These programs should be designed utilizing perspectives from individuals who have lived experience with cancer to ensure that changes to education curricula translate to improved PCC in the clinic. Objectives: Our goal was to identify existing literature describing such programs as well as identify gaps for further development. Methods: Keywords were agreed upon and searched across Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, ERIC, Google Scholar, and MedEdPORTAL databases. Duplicates were removed, unique articles were screened for relevance by title and abstract, and a full text review of each article was completed for validation. Included articles describe methods for involving people with cancer in developing and/or delivering oncology-focused education programs. Results: In total, 15 articles describing 12 unique oncology education programs from 7 different countries were identified, reviewed, and summarized. These programs involved learners undertaking undergraduate medical education, postgraduate medical education, continuing medical education, or training as nurses or radiation therapists. Current literature indicates that classroom-based sessions, experiential or simulated learning modalities, and/or asynchronous online modules can all feasibly be created with the integration of perspectives/narratives of people with cancer. Furthermore, involving people with cancer directly in the design and/or delivery of these education programs may contribute to improved patient experiences. Conclusions: Including the perspectives of people with cancer directly in oncology curriculum development and delivery can improve established pedagogical approaches and enhance learner confidence and competency in delivering PCC. We provide recommendations for stepwise implementation of patient perspectives into oncology education, with the hope that future programs will better prepare and motivate learners to provide PCC aimed at improving cancer care, quality of life, and disease outcomes.
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.