Improvements in undergraduate oncology education introduced at Polish medical universities between 2004 and 2010 under Poland's "National Program for Combating Neoplastic Diseases"

ESO-ESSO-ESTRO Multidisciplinary Course in Oncology for Medical Students: 4 Years of Experience (2016-2019)

The ESO-ESSO-ESTRO Multidisciplinary Course in Oncology is intended to fill the gap of the undergraduate fragmented oncology education, to provide insight into all theoretical and practical aspects of oncology, and to encourage future professional choices towards an oncology discipline. Students are exposed to (a) preclinical cancer topics; (b) natural history of the disease; (c) laboratory diagnostic tests; (d) medical, radiation, surgical, and palliative treatment; and (e) direct or through multidisciplinary patients' approach. Students are obliged to attend (i) all theoretical lectures, (ii) clinical case presentations, (iii) laboratories and ward visits, and (iv) to prepare and present a specific project under supervision. Participation is limited to 24 medical students who are selected through a competitive application process. Between 2016 and 2019, 96 students from 29 countries have attended. Data analysis derived from a given questionnaire demonstrates that most of the participants have declared that (1) they have achieved their expectations and objectives, (2) they have highly rated both clinical and non-clinical teaching oncological topics, and (3) they have been stimulated in developing a professional career in the field of oncology.

The Summer School Oncology Groningen: Improving a Successful International Course by Refining the Old, Maintaining What's Good

For more than two decades, the International Summer School Oncology for Medical Students (ISOMS) has organized a biennial 2-week international summer school program in Groningen, the Netherlands. The summer school aims to increase knowledge about general cancer care, reduce fear of talking to cancer patients, and expose students to cancer-related problems. After 22 years, there was a need to improve the summer school format, the application procedure, and the intensity of the course. Here, we describe and evaluate these and additional changes that were made to the program. Several changes were made to the summer school format. The course was shortened from 10 days to a more intensive 7 days. The scientific program was integrated with the clinical program and students were taught scientific writing and presentation skills. The application process involved a personal video pitch. Importantly, the new summer school format was organized by a committee in which medical students had the lead. To evaluate the changes to the summer school, we conducted knowledge tests and regularly obtained feedback. There was a high overall student satisfaction, with a median score of a 9 out of 10. Students appreciated the interactive sessions and practicals and the scientific program, and were satisfied with the course level. All students had improved test scores. Improvement points highlighted the need for a less packed schedule and more lectures on basic oncology principles, or were related to specific lectures. The student-led innovation and adaptation of the ISOMS has been successful.

Medical Student Perspectives on Undergraduate Oncology Education in the UK

AIMS

The British Oncology Network for Undergraduate Societies (BONUS) surveyed students who attended an oncology revision day to determine their views on the current quantity, quality and type of curriculum-based oncology teaching they have experienced.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Students attending two BONUS revision days received a questionnaire assessing their experience of oncology teaching within the medical curriculum and interest in pursuing a future career in oncology using a 10-point Likert scale. Data were collected with informed consent to be anonymised and used for research. Student demographics and qualitative and quantitative data about experiences of oncology education were analysed.

RESULTS

In total, 451 students registered to attend the revision days. After removal of duplicates, non-responders and non-UK participants, responses from 153 students studying across years 1-6 at 22 UK medical schools were analysed. The mean quantity of oncology lectures students reported receiving was 8.9 hours and the mean quantity of clinic/ward-based oncology teaching was 7.5 hours. Ninety (62.1%) of the 145 students who responded to the relevant question reported that they had received dedicated teaching in oncology. Students who had received dedicated oncology teaching reported a statistically significantly higher mean quality 6.1 (95% confidence interval 5.6-6.5) versus 5.0 (95% confidence interval 4.3-5.5; P = 0.003) and quantity 5.2 (95% confidence interval 4.7-5.6) versus 4.3 (95% confidence interval 3.7-4.9; P = 0.03) of oncology teaching compared with those who had not received this.

CONCLUSION

Appropriate oncology education is essential for all medical students due to the high prevalence of cancer. All future doctors need the appropriate knowledge and communication skills to care for cancer patients. Our analysis provides quantitative evidence to support the value of specialist oncology teaching within the medical school curriculum in improving student-reported experience. National student-led revision days and events may widen interest in a future career in oncology and aid collaboration between oncology societies. It is important for the general undergraduate medical curriculum to integrate specialty content. An integrated curriculum should facilitate a holistic approach that spans prevention, screening, treatment and palliation rather than being split by subspeciality.

Radiation oncology teaching provision and practice prior to and during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in medical schools in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland: a cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVES

Radiotherapy is a key cancer treatment modality but is poorly understood by doctors. We sought to evaluate radiation oncology (RO) teaching in medical schools within the United Kingdom (UK) and Republic of Ireland (RoI), as well as any impacts on RO teaching delivery from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

METHODS

A bespoke online survey instrument was developed, piloted and distributed to oncology teaching leads at all UK and RoI medical schools. Questions were designed to capture information on the structure, format, content and faculty for RO teaching, as well as both the actual and the predicted short- and long-term impacts of COVID-19.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 29/41 (71%) UK and 5/6 (83%) RoI medical schools. Pre-clinical and clinical oncology teaching was delivered over a median of 2 weeks (IQR 1-6), although only 9 (27%) of 34 responding medical schools had a standalone RO module. RO teaching was most commonly delivered in clinics or wards (n = 26 and 25 respectively). Few medical schools provided teaching on the biological basis for radiotherapy (n = 11) or the RO career pathway (n = 8), and few provide teaching delivered by non-medical RO multidisciplinary team members. There was evidence of short- and long-term disruption to RO teaching from COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

RO teaching in the UK and RoI is limited with minimal coverage of relevant theoretical principles and little exposure to radiotherapy departments and their non-medical team members. The COVID-19 pandemic risks exacerbating trainee doctors' already constrained exposure to radiotherapy.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This study provides the first analysis of radiotherapy-related teaching in the UK and RoI, and the first to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on radiationoncology teaching.

Oncology and Radiation Oncology Awareness in Final Year Medical Students in Australia and New Zealand

This study aimed to determine final year students' core oncology and radiation oncology knowledge and attitudes about the quality of teaching in medical programmes delivered in Australia and New Zealand. Does the modern medical programme provide core oncology skills in this leading global cause of mortality and morbidity? An online survey was distributed between April and June 2018 and completed by 316 final year students across all 21 medical schools with final year cohorts in Australia and New Zealand. The survey examined teaching and clinical exposure, attitudes and core knowledge for oncology and radiation oncology. Several questions from a survey done of graduates in 2001 were repeated for comparison. We found that clinical exposure to oncology and its disciplines is low. Students rated oncology and haematology the worst taught medical specialties at medical school. Students reported the most confidence identifying when surgical management of cancer may be indicated and much lower levels of confidence identifying when systemic therapy and radiation therapy may be helpful. The majority of students had no formal course content on radiation therapy and more than one third of final year students erroneously believed that external beam radiation therapy turned patients radioactive. Exposure to oncology practice and the teaching of core oncology knowledge remains low for medical students in Australia and New Zealand. Many areas of oncology teaching and knowledge have worsened for medical students in Australia and New Zealand over the past 20 years. Well-established gaps in the core oncology knowledge of medical graduates must be urgently addressed given the increasing incidence of cancer and ongoing underutilisation of radiation therapy in particular.

Oncology Training in Rwanda: Challenges and Opportunities for Undergraduate Medical Students (The EDUCAN Project)

A critical shortage of trained cancer specialists is one of the major challenges in addressing the increasing cancer burden in low- and middle-income countries. Inadequate undergraduate cancer education in oncology remains a major obstacle for both task shifting to general practitioners and for training of specialists. We provide the first report of cancer education in Rwanda's undergraduate program to survey how new graduates are prepared to provide care for cancer patients. Anonymous online survey was sent January to June 2017 to medical students in their senior clinical years (years 5 and 6). Questions related to the demographics, medical curriculum, and general oncology exposure were included in the survey. Of 192 eligible students, 42% (n = 80) completed the survey and were analyzed. The majority were 25 to 29 years of age and 41% were female. Internal medicine was cited to provide the most exposure to cancer patients (50%) and cancer bedside teaching (55%). Close to a half (46%) have been taught oncology formally in addition to bedside teaching. A tenth (11%) of the participants felt comfortable in attending a cancer patient, and a fifth (21%) of the students felt comfortable while addressing multimodality treatment approach. The majority (99%) of the participants preferred having a formal oncology rotation. Of particular interest, 61% of the students are interested in pursuing an oncology career path. There is a need to modify the current oncology undergraduate curriculum to prepare future physicians for delivering cancer care in Rwanda. Raising the profile of oncology in undergraduate medical education will complement the on-going efforts to increase the country's capacity in task shifting and in training of cancer specialists.

A Thorough Analysis of the Current State of Cancer Education in Medical Schools and Application of Experimental Teaching Techniques and Their Efficacy

Newly diagnosed cases of cancer are expected to double by the year 2040. Although many different oncology teaching initiatives have been implemented, many students continue to report uncertainty when dealing with patients with cancer. Through this review, we aim to find the most effective teaching methods to better prepare future physicians. Papers studying different methods of teaching oncology were identified through a thorough review of specific electronic databases. Each study was analyzed and sorted into one of ten unique categories created by the authors specifically for this review. If portions of the study fit into multiple categories, relevant results would be analyzed in all applicable areas. Additionally, papers were separated and analyzed by country of origin, preclinical or clinical interventional basis, and quantitative versus qualitative form of statistical analysis. A total of 115 papers from 26 different countries and regions were included in the final analysis. 91.4% of papers analyzing Lecture and Small Group Discussions indicated a positive impact. 97.1% of papers analyzing Clinical Practice and Simulation indicated a positive impact. 100% of papers analyzing Early Experience and Mentorship, Summer Programs and Voluntary Electives, use of Multidisciplinary Teams, and Role Play stated that these methods had a positive impact. 50% of papers analyzing Computer/Web Based Programs indicated a positive impact. Clinical Practice and Simulation, Role Play, Summer/Elective Programs and interventions involving Multidisciplinary Team Work all appeared to be most effective. Intensive Block Programs, Didactic Lectures/Small Group Discussions, and Computer/Web Based Education tools as a whole were variable. General Review papers showed continued variability in domestic and international oncology curricula. Incorporation of effective teaching interventions should be highly considered in the future creation of standardized oncology curricula in order to best prepare the next generation of physicians. Future studies could explore the differing efficacies of teaching interventions in the postgraduate versus graduate realms.

Feasibility and Outcomes of Oncology Teaching for 5th Year Medical Students

This study explored medical students' opinions of undergraduate oncology teaching, aiming to define optimal strategies for nonspecialist oncology teaching. A cross-sectional study was conducted at Al Imam Muhammed Ibn Saud Islamic University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Between August 2014 and June 2015, 124 medical students completing the oncology course in the fifth year at the College of Medicine, Al Imam Muhammed Ibn Saud Islamic University, were given a 47-item questionnaire. One hundred and five students completed the questionnaire. Students reported that the oncology teaching fitted well with the course and that they gained knowledge and clinical skills, including understanding of how to break bad news. There was no consensus regarding whether physicians had an ongoing responsibility of care if patients were unable to embrace the treatment offered and whether pain was adequately controlled in patients with cancer. There was good understanding of the ethics of analgesia use and the need to involve patients in the decision-making process. There was a wide spread of opinion when asked if the physician should "decide for themselves how much information to give." Forty-four percent of students stated that they would attend an oncology summer school. This study shows the undergraduate oncology course to be effective in teaching knowledge, ethics, and skills and to be well received by fifth year medical students. Inclusion of appropriate teaching in medical school curricula may be the most effective way to ensure all clinicians acquire appropriate training in oncology.

An interactive contouring module improves engagement and interest in radiation oncology among preclinical medical students: Results of a randomized trial

PURPOSE

Studies have shown significant gaps in knowledge of radiation therapy among medical students and primary care providers. The goal of this study was to evaluate the effect of an interactive contouring module on knowledge and interest in radiation oncology among preclinical medical students.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Second-year medical students at the University of California, San Diego were randomized to participate in an interactive contouring exercise or watch a traditional didactic lecture on radiation oncology. Participants completed knowledge tests and surveys at baseline, immediately following the exercise, and 3 months later. Statistical analysis included Wilcoxon signed-rank test for pre- and posttest comparisons and Wilcoxon rank sum test for comparison between groups.

RESULTS

Forty-three medical students participated in the trial (21 in the didactic group; 22 in the contouring group). Students completing the contouring module demonstrated similar overall knowledge improvement compared with the traditional didactic group (+8.6% vs +6.6%, not significant) but endorsed greater engagement on a 5-point Likert-type scale (3.10 vs 3.76, P = .02). At 3-month follow-up, there was a nonsignificant trend toward improved overall knowledge in the contouring group (43% vs 51%, P = .10), with a significance difference in a subset of questions on knowledge of the process of radiation therapy as well as side effects (51% vs 75%, P = .002). Students in the contouring group demonstrated more interest in pursuing a clinical radiation oncology rotation (2.52 vs 3.27, P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of an interactive contouring module was an effective method to teach preclinical medical students about radiation oncology, with no significant difference in knowledge gained compared with a traditional didactic lecture; however, higher engagement among students completing the contouring module led to improved retention of knowledge of radiation side effects and greater interest in radiation oncology. These data suggest a potential benefit of integrating an interactive radiation oncology module into the preclinical medical school curriculum.

Vienna Summer School on Oncology: how to teach clinical decision making in a multidisciplinary environment

BACKGROUND

Clinical decision making in oncology is based on both inter- and multidisciplinary approach. Hence teaching future doctors involved in oncology or general health practice is crucial. The aim of the Vienna Summer School on Oncology (VSSO) as an international, integrated, undergraduate oncology course is to teach medical students interdisciplinary team communication and application of treatment concepts/algorithms in a multidisciplinary setting.

METHOD

The teaching is based on an inter- and multidisciplinary faculty and a multimodal education approach to address different learning styles. The participants rated their satisfaction of the program voluntarily after finishing the course according to a grading scale from one (not good) to five (very good). The learning success was assessed by a compulsory pre-VSSO and post-VSSO single choice questionnaire.

RESULTS

Program organisation was rated with a mean score of 4.47 out of 5.0 (SD 0.51), composition of the program and range of topics with a mean score of 4.68 (SD 0.58) and all teachers with a mean score of 4.36 (SD 0.40) points. Student evaluation at the beginning and end of the program indicated significant knowledge acquisition -i.e., general aspects of cancer: median 8.75 points (IQR 7.5-9.4) vs.10.0 points (IQR 9.4-10.0) p = 0.005; specific aspects of cancer: median 4.87 points (IQR 3.33-5.71) vs. 8.72 points (IQR 6.78-9.49) p ≤ 0.001, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Even though the participants represent a selection of students with special interest in cancer, the results of the VSSO indicate the benefit of an inter- and multidisciplinary teaching approach within an oncology module.

What Do We Know About Education in Colorectal Cancer Prevention?-Survey Among 1130 Medical Students

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a global public health problem. The degree of knowledge on CRC among medical students, future physicians, brings essential implications for their patients. Therefore, to acquire information about students' knowledge on CRC, a questionnaire survey was conducted in Medical University of Lublin, Poland, with a representative sample of 1130 medical students (basic vs. clinical 552 vs. 578; male vs. female 442 vs. 688). The questionnaire was anonymous and designed in a four-section scheme (CRC risk factors, CRC prevention, CRC symptoms, CRC screening methods). There was a significant difference in the percentage of correct answers between basic and clinical level groups (P = 0.034). In general, clinical students had higher scores for their knowledge regarding CRC. Gender impacted the students' CRC knowledge to a lesser degree; however, if the difference was revealed, female students were more aware about CRC issues (P = 0.045). We found several important deficits in students' knowledge on CRC. These findings should motivate the oncology education coordinator as well as our teachers to introduce innovations in education methods and training environments to enable students to gain necessary knowledge and acquire the skills and competencies that would help them to function as physicians.

Oncology Education in Medical Schools: Towards an Approach that Reflects Australia's Health Care Needs

Cancer has recently overtaken heart disease to become the number 1 cause of mortality both globally and in Australia. As such, adequate oncology education must be an integral component of medical school if students are to achieve learning outcomes that meet the needs of the population. The aim of this review is to evaluate the current state of undergraduate oncology education and identify how Australian medical schools can improve oncology learning outcomes for students and, by derivative, improve healthcare outcomes for Australians with cancer. The review shows that oncology is generally not well represented in medical school curricula, that few medical schools offer mandatory oncology or palliative care rotations, and that junior doctors are exhibiting declining oncology knowledge and skills. To address these issues, Australian medical schools should implement the Oncology Education Committee's Ideal Oncology Curriculum, enact mandatory oncology and palliative care clinical rotations for students, and in doing so, appreciate the importance of students' differing approaches to learning.