Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39104855›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical education and curricular development

Educating Hematology-Oncology Fellows About How to Communicate with Patients About Clinical Trials: A Needs Assessment.

Naomi D Parker, Martina C Murphy, Susan Eggly, Elisa S Weiss, Tithi B Amin, Easton N Wollney, Kevin B Wright, Daphne R Friedman, Maria Sae-Hau, Andrea Sitlinger and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

14 authors.

Naomi D ParkerDepartment of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6783-9666
Martina C MurphyDepartment of Medicine, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Susan EgglyDepartment of Oncology, Wayne State University/Karmanos Cancer Institute, Detroit, MI, USA.
Elisa S WeissThe Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, Rye Brook, NY, USA.
Tithi B AminDepartment of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Easton N WollneyDepartment of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Kevin B WrightCollege of Humanities and Social Sciences, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA.
Daphne R FriedmanDepartment of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Maria Sae-HauThe Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, Rye Brook, NY, USA.
Andrea SitlingerDepartment of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Stephanie A S StarasDepartment of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Leah SzumitaThe Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, Rye Brook, NY, USA.
Eric CooksThe Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, Rye Brook, NY, USA.
Carma L BylundDepartment of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Only 5-8% of adults with cancer participate in cancer clinical trials (CCTs), with even lower rates among underrepresented groups. Improving oncologists' communication skills may enhance the frequency and quality of their discussions with patients about CCTs, consequently increasing participation. However, little is known about interest in or presence of CCT-related communication training during Hematology-Oncology (Hem-Onc) fellowships. This study aimed to describe, from the perspective of Hem-Onc fellowship program directors (PDs): (1) the current landscape of CCT education for Hem-Onc fellows; (2) the acceptability and feasibility of implementing a CCT communication skills workshop for Hem-Onc fellows. Methods: We used an explanatory sequential mixed-methods approach. PDs were surveyed and interviewed about their graduate medical education (GME) programs' current CCT curriculum, training challenges, fellows' CCT knowledge and CCT communication skills, and preferences for a CCT communication workshop. Results: PDs were surveyed (n = 40) and interviewed (n = 12). PDs reported that their institutions prioritize CCT accrual (M = 4.58, SD = .78; 1-5 scale, 5 = "Strongly Agree") and clinical research training (M = 4.20, SD = .85). CCT skills that programs least often addressed were how to (1) discuss CCTs with newly diagnosed patients, (2) talk to patients about CCTs when none are available, and (3) help patients find CCTs at other institutions. PDs were interested in a CCT communication workshop for fellows ("yes" = 67.5%, "maybe" = 32.5%) and said training would be feasible (M = 4.28, SD = .78) and useful (M = 4.47, SD = .78). Qualitative results described programs' current approaches to CCT education and insights about developing and implementing CCT communication training. Conclusions: There is a clear need to improve CCT communication skills training in Hem-Onc fellowship programs and to implement and scale such training to increase CCT participation, especially among diverse patient populations. Furthermore, Hem-Onc GME PDs view such training as feasible and useful.

Indexed as

cancer clinical trialscommunication skills trainingeducational interventionGraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID39104855
PMCPMC11299213

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.