ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2026
Patient Advocate-Trainee Engagement in Oncology Education: Insights from a Short Pilot Survey.
Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Patient advocates represent the voice of the patient community and bring a unique perspective to research. We hypothesized that including patient advocates in research training would increase trainees ability to communicate their science, understand the impact of their work and increase their empathy for patients. An IRB-approved survey was administered to assess the impact of patient advocate feedback on trainees who presented their research via posters at our Radiation Oncology Research Symposium. Trainees reported demographics and self-assessed their use of lay language, changes in empathy, understanding the impact of their research, and potential future implications. The binomial proportion test and Fisher’s exact test were used to determine significance. The survey was completed by 80% (28/35) of trainees who participated in the poster session and interacted with patient advocates. Trainees were predominantly younger (60.7% under 30yo) and people of color (60.7%). Almost all trainees (96.4%) were comfortable talking to advocates but only 89.29% were comfortable using lay language. Trainees agreed (75%) that interacting with advocates increased their empathy. Most trainees (71.4%) believed patient advocates helped them understand the significance of their research and 64.3% believed advocates helped them develop new research ideas. Most trainees would like advocates at future poster presentations (85.7%), but did not want them to participate in study design or analysis. Gender and training level did not affect trainees’ ability to communicate in lay language, their empathy for patients, or understanding of their work’s clinical relevance. Including patient advocates in poster sessions may improve trainees ability to present their research in lay language, increase their empathy and understand the clinical impact of their research. Future radiation oncology training should consider including the patient advocate voice to improve the tangible connection between research and real-world impact.
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.