ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2026
Impact of the University of Louisville Cancer Education Program.
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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cancer remains a significant public health challenge that requires a multidisciplinary workforce equipped with strong cancer research skills and clinical insight. Over the past decade, the University of Louisville's Cancer Education Program was developed to enhance career trajectories in oncology through a mentored cancer research experience for both professional and college students.In a structured 10-week program, trainees participated in hypothesis-driven cancer research, received multilevel mentoring, and engaged in career-enhancement activities. We evaluated de-identified participant feedback on interest in cancer research, mentoring, career-enhancement activities, cancer survivors' testimonials, and research self-efficacy. Qualitative assessments were rated on scales of quality (excellent to unsatisfactory) and change (very large to no change). To assess interest in cancer research before and after the program, we used the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Comparisons of various program components were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U or Kruskal-Wallis test. We summarized emerging themes from open-ended survey questions.Participants demonstrated a significant increase in their interest in cancer research (P < 0.0001) following the program, and multilevel mentoring contributed to improvements in research self-efficacy. Compared with a seminar, participants preferred cancer survivors' testimonials (P < 0.0001), as these humanized cancer research and motivated them to pursue careers in cancer research and clinical oncology. Lastly, structured workshops and peer-to-peer interactive learning increased participants' confidence in communicating science to mixed audiences.Our program results underscore the importance of investing in initiatives to develop a robust and capable cancer research workforce that addresses evolving challenges in cancer prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41762419What 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.