Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40081205›Full record

ArticleESMO open2025

Oncology professionals' perceptions and recommendations to improve well-being and health at work in times of crisis: qualitative thematic analysis from the ESMO Resilience Task Force survey series.

C Hardy, E Thorne, M O'Connor, E Élez, K Kamposioras, K Punie, C Oing, K Murali, J B A G Haanen, K H J Lim and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in ESMO open, 2025. 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

12 authors.

C HardyDivision of Health Research, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
E ThorneDivision of Health Research, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK; Example Coaching and Consulting Ltd., Ukfield, UK.
M O'ConnorBreast Cancer Centre, University Hospital Waterford, Waterford, Ireland.
E ÉlezVall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology, Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
K KamposiorasDepartment of Medical Oncology, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
K PunieDepartment of Medical Oncology, Ziekenhuis aan de Stroom, Antwerp, Belgium.
C OingTranslational and Clinical Research Institute, Centre for Cancer, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK; Northern Centre for Cancer Care, The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
K MuraliVictorian Clinical Genetics Services & Murdoch Children's Research Institute, The Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
J B A G HaanenDivision of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
K H J LimAdvanced Immunotherapy and Cell Therapy Team, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
S BanerjeeGynaecology Unit, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; Division of Clinical Studies, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK. Electronic address: Susana.Banerjee@rmh.nhs.uk.
ESMO Resilience Task Force

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Resilience Task Force (RTF) was established to address burnout and well-being issues among oncology professionals. In this article, we present findings on shared perceptions and recommendations to support and improve oncology professionals' well-being and health at work. MATERIALS AND

methodsInductive thematic analysis of qualitative responses from three global ESMO RTF surveys (2020-2021) was conducted using Braun and Clarke's six-step approach. Open-ended questions elicited suggestions, including descriptions of 'pleasant physical working conditions' in the third survey. Respondents (n = 989) were gender-balanced, from 90 countries, with half practising in Europe. Most were of white ethnicity, worked in medical oncology, and had over 10 years of experience.

resultsSix main themes described help and support needs from oncology professionals: training, education, information and learning; well-being; activism and advocacy; financial support; safety; and opportunities and career. Six additional themes described factors contributing to a 'pleasant physical working environment': physical working environment; working conditions and job role; safety; well-being and coping; working relations and support from others; and career and professional development.

conclusionsThis is the largest global qualitative analysis of oncology professionals' needs during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, offering actionable recommendations for ESMO and other stakeholders to address work-related issues. Addressing these needs can foster resilience, improve working conditions, and promote better health and well-being.

Indexed as

Burnout, ProfessionalCOVID-19Medical OncologyOncologistsAdultAdvisory CommitteesEuropeFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOccupational HealthQualitative ResearchResilience, PsychologicalSARS-CoV-2Surveys and QuestionnairesburnoutCOVID-19oncologistsresiliencewell-being

Identifiers

PMID40081205
PMCPMC11932838

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.