ArticleTechnical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology2026
Radiation therapist research engagement and culture: findings from the ESTRO radiation therapist workshop.
Article in Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Despite widespread recognition of the value of research among radiation therapists (RTTs), sustained engagement remains low across international settings. This study aimed to explore RTT perspectives on research engagement, characterise the cultural conditions shaping participation, and generate structured recommendations for strengthening RTT research culture. Materials and Methods: A qualitative, workshop-based study was conducted through the ESTRO RTT workshop series. A sixteen-member Research Engagement Expert Reference Group (RE-ERG), drawn from ten countries, participated in two virtual sessions. The cultural web framework was applied in Workshop 1 to map research culture across six organisational elements. In Workshop 2, participants validated findings and developed recommendations structured around three strategic pillars: Preserve, Adapt, and Innovate (PAI). Real-time polling and recorded transcripts were analysed using deductive thematic analysis informed by the cultural web framework. Results: Two cross-cutting tensions emerged: a persistent recognition-to-practice gap in which strong endorsement of research coexisted with structural barriers to participation, and a reliance on individual commitment rather than systemic support, with research frequently described as "hidden work" conducted outside rostered hours. 15/16 participants (94%) agreed that RTTs could make a significant contribution to research. The Preserve pillar identified five foundational strengths including collaboration, mentorship, visibility, organisational support, and patient-focused research. The Adapt pillar generated recommendations addressing education, governance simplification, career pathway clarity, and protected time. The Innovate pillar emphasised research champion roles, graduated fellowship schemes, digital collaboration platforms, and embedding research within departmental objectives and international networks. Conclusion: RTTs collectively articulate a clear and actionable vision for research culture development, yet realising it requires coordinated action from departments, national professional bodies, and international organisations. Applying the cultural web framework alongside the PAI pillars produced practitioner-grounded recommendations that move beyond barrier identification towards infrastructures that make research participation an expected and enabled dimension of RTT professional practice.
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.