ArticlePEC innovation2026
Feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of an LGBTQ+ inclusive communication skills training for multidisciplinary oncology healthcare providers.
Article in PEC innovation, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: To test the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of an LGBTQ+ inclusive communication skills training program. Methods: Two modules focused on basic LGBTQ+ sensitivity and communication with LGBTQ+ patients' families were delivered for multidisciplinary oncology healthcare professionals (HCPs) during two training sessions. Feasibility was determined through recruitment rate and adherence. Acceptability was evaluated based on course evaluations. Pre-/post-training assessments included LGBTQ+ healthcare knowledge, beliefs towards LGBTQ+ people, and self-efficacy. Results: Participants were predominantly female (83%) and included 1 nurse, 2 chaplains, 8 nurse practitioners, and 7 physicians. Of the 22 HCPs who initially expressed interest and registered for the training, a total of 18 (82%) participated. 89% of participants completed post-training evaluations within one week. The training was rated favorably; 80% of participants "agreed" or "strongly agreed" with 13 of 15 course evaluation items. From pre- to post-training, LGBTQ+ health knowledge increased for 6 of 14 items and self-efficacy improved significantly for all 9 items evaluated (total score, d = 1.32); beliefs did not change between assessment points. Conclusions: An LGBTQ+ communication training for multidisciplinary oncology HCPs was feasible to deliver, acceptable to participants, and led to increases in LGBTQ+ healthcare knowledge and participant self-efficacy from pre- to post-training. Innovation: LGBTQ+ inclusive communication training fills a crucial gap in HCP research, education, and practice, providing a novel experiential learning approach to mitigating health inequities for LGBTQ+ patients and their families.
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.