ArticleJournal of medical imaging and radiation oncology2025
A Survey Study on the Roles, Responsibilities and Workforce Characteristics of Radiation Oncology Nurses in Australia.
Article in Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRadiation Oncology Nurses (RONs) are key members of the radiation oncology team; however, the role of the RON is not always clear. The aims of this study were to provide an overview of the RON workforce in Australia, to describe the roles and responsibilities of RONs, and to identify challenges and job satisfaction of RONs.
methodsThis was a two-part multi-methods survey study. Two self-reported questionnaires were distributed online using purposive and snowball sampling: Radiation Oncology Facility Survey (ROFS) and RON Workforce Survey (RONWS). The surveys used tick boxes, Likert scale and open and closed-ended questions. Frequencies and percentages were calculated for categorical variables; mean/standard deviation for continuous variables.
resultsA total of 42 responses were received for the ROFS and 139 for the RONWS, representing all States and Territories in Australia except the Australian Capital Territory (ACT): 52% were metropolitan and 50% were public facilities. Only 17% reported radiation oncology specific training, but 58% had plans to further their education. 80% reported being satisfied with their career and position, believing their role was recognised and generally respected among colleagues and patients. Areas of dissatisfaction included salary, staffing resources and opportunities for advancement.
conclusionThis is the largest study of RONs in Australia, revealing that RON is a satisfying oncology specialty. Data from this study can be used to identify opportunities for improvement in staffing, engagement and retention of RONs, possibly leading to the development of national guidelines for radiation oncology nursing in Australia.
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.