Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40674725›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical education2025

A Web-Based Training Intervention for Primary Care Providers on Preparing Patients for Cancer Treatment Decisions and Conversations About Clinical Trials: Evaluation of a Pilot Study Using Mixed Methods and Follow-Up.

Naomi D Parker, Margo Michaels, Carla L Fisher, Alyssa Crowe, Elisa S Weiss, Maria Sae-Hau, Jason Arnold, Andrea Cassells, Domenic Durante, Ji-Hyun Lee and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical education, 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

15 authors.

Naomi D ParkerDepartment of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6783-9666
Margo MichaelsSchool of Public Health, Boston University, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8592-551X
Carla L FisherDepartment of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3903-4278
Alyssa CroweDepartment of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.ORCID 0009-0009-9905-9267
Elisa S WeissThe Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6690-991X
Maria Sae-HauThe Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5160-7721
Jason ArnoldDepartment of E-Learning, Technology, and Communications, College of Education, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6164-3200
Andrea CassellsClinical Directors Network, Inc, New York, NY, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5579-0298
Domenic DuranteDepartment of E-Learning, Technology, and Communications, College of Education, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6981-0958
Ji-Hyun LeeDepartment of Biostatistics, College of Public Health and Health Professions, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6420-5150
Raymond Mailhot VegaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0616-034X
Ana Natale-PereiraDepartment of Medicine, New Jersey Medical School, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9066-7738
Taylor S VasquezDepartment of Public Relations, College of Journalism and Communications, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1146-4244
Zhongyue ZhangUF Health Cancer Center, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.ORCID 0009-0004-8557-638X
Carma L BylundDepartment of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9335-1496

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecruitment to cancer clinical trials (CCTs) is low, particularly for underrepresented groups such as uninsured patients, those with low-income status, and racial and ethnic minoritized individuals. A significant barrier is that treating oncologists often fail to inform patients about the possibility of CCT participation as an option for quality cancer care. Therefore, patient inquiries about trials before starting treatment should be normalized and encouraged, particularly for underrepresented groups. Primary care providers (PCPs) are uniquely suited to do this because they interact with patients at the time of cancer diagnosis, provide ongoing care, and are trusted sources of information.

objectiveThis study was designed to pilot an innovative web-based CCT training intervention for PCPs, including practicing clinicians and trainees, to increase their ability to prepare patients for cancer treatment decisions and conversations with oncologists about clinical trials.

methodsWe conducted an evaluation of a pilot study using a self-guided, 1-hour web-based training intervention for PCPs with survey assessments before the intervention, immediately after the intervention, and at the 3-month follow-up. We used a mixed methods approach, incorporating quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis. The evaluation was guided by the Kirkpatrick evaluation model, focusing on levels 1 (reaction), 2 (learning), and 3 (behavior).

resultsA total of 29 PCPs completed the intervention and pre- and postintervention measures, with 28 (97%) PCPs completing the 3-month follow-up assessment. Of these 28 PCPs, 8 (29%) participated in a qualitative interview after the 3-month follow-up assessment. Participants reported high levels of satisfaction with the course. CCT knowledge, as well as attitudes and beliefs, improved after the course and were sustained at the 3-month follow-up. PCPs reported willingness to communicate with patients about cancer treatment options, including CCTs, and willingness to talk with their colleagues about potential changes in referral practices. However, fewer PCPs had actually engaged in these conversations by the 3-month follow-up. In the interviews, PCPs cited limited interprofessional knowledge sharing and organizational constraints as barriers. Notably, PCPs reported changes in their communication behavior with patients: a higher proportion reported communicating with patients at the time of referral about cancer treatment options and clinical trials at the 3-month follow-up than at baseline. In the interviews, PCPs reported that they felt more comfortable and empowered to have these conversations.

conclusionsThis pilot study found that a self-guided, 1-hour web-based training intervention for PCPs resulted in improved knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs, as well as improved communication with patients, to prepare them for discussions with oncologists about cancer treatment and CCTs. Future dissemination of this course has the potential to make an impact on CCT accrual.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicInternet-Based InterventionNeoplasmsPhysicians, Primary CareAdultCommunicationDecision MakingFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedPhysician-Patient RelationsPilot ProjectsPrimary Health Carecancer clinical trialscancer treatmentcontinuing educationcontinuing medical educationonline learningprimary care providersprovider-patient communicationreferral practices

Identifiers

PMID40674725
PMCPMC12314468

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.