Promoting a research culture among junior radiation oncologists: outcomes from the introduction of the Australian and New Zealand research requirement in training

Research productivity of RANZCR radiation oncology trainees from 2014 to 2023

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to describe the research productivity among RANZCR Radiation Oncology (RO) trainees.

METHODS

Publicly available data on RO fellows, who were awarded the RANZCR fellowship between July 2014 and June 2023, was extracted from the RANZCR Annual Reports. Fellows who had qualified overseas and did not undertake full RANZCR training were excluded. A PubMed search was performed for publications by each fellow in the 5 years prior, and 6 months, after the estimated completion of training. Research productivity was defined as the number of first-author and any-author publications per trainee.

RESULTS

In total, 168 eligible RO fellows were included in this study. 104 (62%) and 118 (70%) fellows had first-author and any-author publications during training, respectively. A total of 203 first-author and 308 unique any-author publications were identified, with mean first-author and any-author publications per trainee of 1.21 (SD = 2.37) and 2.02 (SD = 3.71), respectively. Trainee research was most commonly published in JMIRO (34% of first-author and 27% of any-author publications). There were significant differences in the number of first-author publications by gender (P = 0.04) and training jurisdictions (P = 0.03). There were also differences in the number of any-author publications by gender (P = 0.002) and training jurisdictions (P = 0.03). There was a significant increase in any-author publications over the 9-year study period (P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

This is the first study evaluating research productivity among RO fellows during training. We identified disparities in research productivity by gender and training jurisdictions. This offers opportunities to tailor efforts to better support a vibrant and productive research culture across the RO training program.

Recommendations for the College of Intensive Care Medicine (CICM) trainee research project: A modified Delphi study

Objective

To determine the perceived barriers and enablers to efficient completion of the College of Intensive Care Medicine (CICM) of Australia and New Zealand Formal Project - a trainee research project mandated for award of CICM Fellowship - and to develop consensus-based recommendations to support Intensive Care trainees and supervisors.

Design

A two-stage modified Delphi study was conducted. In stage one, an anonymous electronic survey was distributed with three targeted open-ended questions relating to perceived key steps, barriers to, and improvements for efficient completion of the Formal Project. A thematic analysis used the survey results to generate a list of close-ended questions.In stage two, a consensus panel comprising of 30 panellists including CICM trainees, Formal Project supervisors and assessors, and critical care researchers, underwent a Delphi process with two rounds of voting and discussion to generate consensus-based recommendations.

Setting

Surveys were distributed to Intensive Care Units across Australia and New Zealand. The consensus panel convened at the Queensland Critical Care Research Network Annual Scientific Meeting in Redcliffe, Queensland, Australia, on 9 June 2023.

Participants

CICM trainees, Formal Project supervisors and assessors, and critical care researchers in Australia and New Zealand.

Main outcome measures

Consensus-based recommendations for the CICM Formal Project.

Results

We received 88 responses from the stage one survey. Stage two finalised 22 consensus-based recommendations, centring on key steps of the research process, resources for trainees, and support and training for supervisors.

Conclusions

Twenty-two recommendations were developed aiming to make the process of completing the mandatory CICM research project more efficient, and to improve the quality of research produced from these projects.

Perceived attitudes and barriers towards medical research: a survey of Jordanian interns, residents, and other postgraduates

PURPOSE

We investigated research barriers among Jordanian medical postgraduates to understand the current context of the local health research landscape and improve scholarly output.

METHODS

Using a validated questionnaire, Jordanian interns, residents, specialists, and consultants were examined for their perceived attitudes and barriers towards research. Participants were conveniently sampled from public, university, military, and private institutions. Differences in responses were examined using the Student t-test and analysis of variance. Binary logistic regression was utilized to examine predictors of being able to publish.

RESULTS

A total of 1,141 Jordanian medical postgraduates were recruited, of which 61.3% were junior postgraduates (i.e., interns and residents in their first 2 years of residency) while 38.7% were senior postgraduates (i.e., senior residents, specialists, and consultants). Around 76.0% of participants had no peer-reviewed publications. Of those with least one publication (n=273), only 31.1% had first authorships. Participants portrayed dominantly positive attitudes towards the importance of research. There were no significant differences between junior and senior postgraduates for overall attitudes (p=0.486) and knowledge barriers scores (p=0.0261). Conversely, senior postgraduates demonstrated higher mean organizational barriers (p<0.001). Seniority (odds ratio [OR], 5.268; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.341-8.307), age (OR, 1.087; 95% CI, 1.019-1.159), academic standing (OR, 1.730; 95% CI, 1.103-2.715), and confidence (OR, 1.086; 95% CI, 1.009-1.169) were positive predictors of publication in peer reviewed journals.

CONCLUSION

The Jordanian medical research landscape is riddled with all forms of different barriers. The reworking of current and integration of new research training programs are of utmost importance.

A Successful Gap-Year Clinical Research Technician (CRT) Program at an Academic Anesthesiology Department

BACKGROUND

Many students elect to take gap years in between graduating college and matriculating into medical school. At an academic institution, investigators can be limited in conducting research due to clinical endeavors. Utilizing a structured, clinical research, gap-year program with students called clinical research technicians (CRTs) can aid both investigators conducting research and students applying to graduate health programs. In this original article, we sought to understand CRT and investigator perceptions of and experiences in the program.

METHODS

We distributed a survey to past and present CRTs and the investigators with whom they worked at Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center. We conducted thematic and sentiment analyses of the survey results. We also collected data on grant approvals, research funding awards, and CRT, clinical research nurse, and clinical research coordinator salaries.

RESULTS

We received responses from 20/29 investigators and 21/22 CRTs. We identified five themes for the investigator survey, including research accuracy and precision; research output; alleviating responsibilities; cost; and likelihood of referral. We identified five themes for the CRT survey, including future career assistance; physician career insights; mentorship; likelihood of referral; and other. The majority of respondents strongly agreed or agreed with the survey statements. The majority of comments were coded as positive. All of CRTs were accepted into a graduate health profession program.

CONCLUSIONS

 Our program's success demonstrates how a structured, clinical research, gap-year program for premedical students can serve as a new educational tool and important research infrastructure resource for hospitals.

Perceived barriers towards the importance and application of medical research: a source of gender disparity among medical undergraduates

BACKGROUND

Little is known about gender disparity among medical undergraduates in the developing world. Therefore, this study aims to explore the attitudes and perceived barriers among Jordanian medical students, particularly women.

METHODS

An online, self-administered questionnaire, developed after an extensive literature review, was disseminated across all six Jordanian medical schools targeting more than 5000 medical students. Student t-test and ANOVA were used to document mean differences among different groups. Linear and logistic regression models were used to find predictors of publication and number of publications.

RESULTS

A total of 636 students participated in the survey with a women to men ratio of 1.1. Women medical students report significantly higher knowledge (t(634) = 2.47, p = 0.013), personal (t(634) = 3.31, p = 0.001), and total barriers scores than men (t(634) = 3.02, p = 0.003). Moreover, compared to men, women were less likely to find same-sex mentorship (t(634) = 3.18, p = 0.001) or receive credited authorship (t(634) = 2.12, p = 0.011). Overall, women medical students were more likely to perceive that their gender (t(634) = 3.58, p < 0.001) and people's perception of their gender (t(634) = 4.25, p < 0.001) are barriers to their career advancement. Binary logistic regression demonstrated that gender is a significant predictor of being able to publish (OR: 1.645; 95%CI: 1.002-2.731), while linear regression demonstrated that gender is a predictor of number of publications (ß: 0.113; 95%CI: 0.063-0.288).

CONCLUSION

A significant gender disparity exists in terms of both attitudes and overall barriers among Jordanian medical undergraduates which calls for immediate policy changes as to produce successful clinicians and researchers.

Survey of brachytherapy training experience among radiation oncology trainees and fellows in the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR)

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate brachytherapy training experience among trainees and fellows trained through the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR).

METHODS

All current trainees and fellows (who obtained fellowship from 2015 onwards) were sent an online anonymous questionnaire on various aspects of brachytherapy training, including number of cases observed/ performed, opinions on brachytherapy assessment during training, barriers to brachytherapy training and future role of brachytherapy.

RESULTS

The overall survey response rate was 24% (40/161 trainees, 30/126 fellows). Of the 70 respondents, 50 (71%), 38 (54%) and 43 (61%) reported to have received formal brachytherapy teaching from radiation oncologists, radiation therapists and medical physicists respectively. Most respondents had exposure to gynaecology brachytherapy - two-thirds of trainees and all fellows have performed at least one gynaecology brachytherapy procedure. Prostate brachytherapy exposure was more limited - by the end of training, 27% and 13% of fellows did not have exposure to LDR and HDR prostate brachytherapy. More than two-thirds indicated there should be a minimum number of brachytherapy case requirements during training, and half indicated that trainees should be involved in ≥6 gynaecology brachytherapy procedures. Barriers affecting training include lack of caseload (70%) and perceived decreasing role of brachytherapy (66%). Forty-three percent of respondents were concerned about the decline in brachytherapy utilisation.

CONCLUSION

This is the first survey on brachytherapy training experience among RANZCR trainees and fellows. It highlighted limited brachytherapy exposure during RANZCR training, and the need to revisit brachytherapy training requirement in the current training programme, along with long-term brachytherapy workforce planning.

Determinants of research productivity during postgraduate medical education: a structured review

BACKGROUND

Although formal participation in research is an integral and often mandatory component of clinical training programs, resulting productivity is highly variable. The objective of this review was to identify determinants of successful research performance among graduate medical education trainees.

METHODS

A structured review of the published literature was performed by searching PubMed, CINAHL, and EMBASE from inception through to 7 April, 2021. Articles examining graduate medical education trainee research productivity evidenced by publications in peer-reviewed journals were included.

RESULTS

Eighty-five articles were included of which most (66; 78%) were reported from the USA or Canada (10; 12%). A wide range of disciplines were represented with the most common being general surgery, internal medicine, orthopedic surgery, and pediatrics. Themes (number of reports) included trainee characteristics (n = 24), project characteristics (n = 8), mentoring/supervision (n = 11), and programmatic aspects (n = 57). Although variable results were observed, research productivity tended to be higher with prior research experience, later years of training, male gender, and pursuit of a postgraduate degree. Few project related aspects of success were identified. Trainee publication was associated with mentors with higher rank, publication productivity, and supportive academic environments. Training programs with organised programs/curricula including protection of time for research were associated with increased productivity as were provision of incentives or rewards but not mandatory requirements.

CONCLUSION

This review identifies several trainee characteristics, project and mentor aspects, and programmatic aspects associated with increased productivity that may serve as a useful resource for trainees and graduate medical education training programs.

Assessing radiation oncology research needs in India: Results of a physician survey

Background

In India, where the annual incidence of cancer is projected to reach 1.7 million by 2020, the need for clinical research to establish the most effective, resource-guided, and evidence-based care is paramount. In this study, we sought to better understand the research training needs of radiation oncologists in India.

Methods

A 12 item questionnaire was developed to assess research training needs and was distributed at the research methods course jointly organized by Indian College of Radiation Oncology, the American Brachytherapy Society, and Education Committee of the American Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology during the Indian Cancer Congress, 2017.

Results

Of 100 participants who received the questionnaire, 63% responded. Ninety percent (56/63) were Radiation Oncologists. Forty-two percent (26/63) of respondents had previously conducted research. A longer length of practice (>10 years) was significantly associated with conducting research (odds ratio (OR) 6.99, P = 0.031) and having formal research training trended toward significance (OR 3.03, P = 0.058). The most common reason for not conducting research was "lack of training" (41%, 14/34). The most common types of research conducted were Audits and Retrospective studies (62%, 16/26), followed by a Phase I/II/III Trial (46%, 10/26). Having formal research training was a significant factor associated with writing a protocol (OR 5.53, P = 0.016). Limited training in research methods (54%, 13/24) and lack of mentorship (42%, 10/24) were cited as reasons for not developing a protocol. Ninety-seven percent (57/59) of respondents were interested in a didactic session on research, specifically focusing on biostatistics.

Conclusions

With research training and mentorship, there is a greater likelihood that concepts and written protocols will translate into successfully completed studies in radiation therapy.

Feedback survey on the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists Faculty of Radiation Oncology trainee research requirement

INTRODUCTION

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists Faculty of Radiation Oncology (FRO) requires trainees to complete a research project prior to the exit (phase II) examinations. We report results of a survey of current FRO trainees and Fellows graduating since 2013, regarding their experience of the overall requirement, supervision, barriers to project completion and subsequent publication.

METHODS

A 32-question online survey was sent via email to 285 FRO members in July 2019. Responses were anonymous.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 32% (trainees 41%, Fellows 21%); 70% of respondents were trainees. About three-quarters of projects were retrospective reviews (64%) or surveys (13%), 94% met College requirements at first submission, 71% were published, and 81% were presented at a scientific meeting. Most assistance was provided by the project supervisor (57%), statistician (47%), another consultant (36%) or the Director of Training (28%). Finding time amongst other clinical/curriculum commitments, rotating to another training site and availability of a suitable supervisor were notable obstacles. Over half (52%) of respondents were satisfied/very satisfied with the process overall and 20% dissatisfied/very dissatisfied; 19% and 30%, respectively, thought requiring acceptance for peer review and completion prior to the phase II examination unreasonable/very unreasonable. Four per cent reported being less likely to be involved in future research as a result of this experience.

CONCLUSION

While the majority of respondents perceive the FRO research requirements as reasonable, a significant minority are not satisfied with aspects of the programme. Amendment of the pre-phase II stipulation may be worthy of consideration.

Importance of publishing research varies by doctors’ career stage, specialty and location of work

Purpose

To investigate whether publishing research is an important aspect of medical careers, and how it varies by specialty and rural or metropolitan location.

Methods

Annual national panel survey (postal or online) of Australian doctors between 2008 and 2016, with aggregated participants including 11 263 junior doctors not enrolled in a specialty (‘pre-registrars’), 9745 junior doctors enrolled as specialist trainees, non-general practitioner (GP) (‘registrars’) and 35 983 qualified as specialist consultants, non-GP (‘consultants’). Main outcome was in agreement that ‘research publications are important to progress my training’ (junior doctors) or ‘research publications are important to my career’ (consultants).

Results

Overall, the highest proportion agreeing were registrars (65%) and pre-registrars (60%), compared with consultants (36%). After accounting for key covariates, rural location was significantly associated with lower importance of publishing research for pre-registrars (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.78) and consultants (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.76), but not for registrars. Compared with anaesthetics, research importance was significantly higher for pre-registrars pursuing surgery (OR 4.46, 95% CI 3.57 to 5.57) and obstetrics/gynaecology careers, for registrars enrolled in surgery (OR 2.97, 95% CI 2.34 to 3.75) and internal medicine training, and consultants of internal medicine (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.63 to 2.08), pathology, radiology and paediatrics.

Conclusions

This study provides new quantitative evidence showing that the importance of publishing research is related to medical career stages, and is most important to junior doctors seeking and undertaking different specialty training options. Embedding research requirements more evenly into specialty college selection criteria may stimulate uptake of research. Expansion of rural training pathways should consider capacity building to support increased access to research opportunities in these locations.

Fostering a culture of research within a clinical radiation oncology department

INTRODUCTION

Support and investment in increasing a research-active culture in clinical practice needs to be translated at the department and hospital levels as well as regional, state and national levels. We aimed to improve the research culture of our department, to enable more clinical staff to become more research competent and research active.

METHODS

We describe and discuss the appointment of a Director of Research and a Research Coordinator into our already-research-active department and the interactions at the research-clinical interface. By identifying barriers and instituting enablers which ameliorate their effect, we explore how a clinical department can utilize the resources already available with the goal of developing a more confident and competent clinician-researcher culture as measured by a range of research metrics.

RESULTS

We observed an improved research culture within our department. Our department's improved research culture was reflected by increased numbers of peer-reviewed publications (of 30%), research students/supervisions (of 60%) and engagement of external speakers. We also observed double the number of first-authored peer-reviewed articles and a growth in conference presentations, posters and speaker invitations/awards. In the majority of the research performance metrics tracked, there was a steady improvement noted over the four years monitored.

CONCLUSIONS

By responding to the barriers of staff (such as time, expertise and ideas) with structural and personal enablers, as well as funded resources, it is possible to develop research capacity and confidence in a clinical setting.

The need for multidisciplinarity in specialist training to optimize future patient care

Harmonious interactions between radiation, medical, interventional and surgical oncologists, as well as other members of multidisciplinary teams, are essential for the optimization of patient care in oncology. This multidisciplinary approach is particularly important in the current landscape, in which standard-of-care approaches to cancer treatment are evolving towards highly targeted treatments, precise image guidance and personalized cancer therapy. Herein, we highlight the importance of multidisciplinarity and interdisciplinarity at all levels of clinical oncology training. Potential deficits in the current career development pathways and suggested strategies to broaden clinical training and research are presented, with specific emphasis on the merits of trainee involvement in functional multidisciplinary teams. Finally, the importance of training in multidisciplinary research is discussed, with the expectation that this awareness will yield the most fertile ground for future discoveries. Our key message is for cancer professionals to fulfil their duty in ensuring that trainees appreciate the importance of multidisciplinary research and practice.

Engaging Future Clinical Oncology Researchers: An Initiative to Integrate Teaching of Biostatistics and Research Methodology into Specialty Training

AIMS

To evaluate the learner's perspectives on a novel workshop programme designed to improve skills in biostatistics, research methodology and critical appraisal in oncology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Trainees were surveyed anonymously at the completion of each annual workshop from 2012 to 2015. In total, 103 trainees in years 2-4 of training in radiation oncology responded, giving a 94% survey response rate. A 1 day workshop, designed by biostatisticians and radiation oncologist facilitators, is the central component of a programme teaching skills in biostatistics, research methods and critical appraisal. This links short didactic lectures about statistical concepts to interactive trainee discussions around discipline-related publications.

RESULTS

The workshop was run in conjunction with the major radiation oncology clinical trials group meeting with alternating programmes (A and B). Most of the participants (44-47/47 for A and 48-55/56 for B), reported that their understanding of one or more individual topics improved as a result of teaching. Refinement of the workshop over time led to a more favourable perception of the 'optimal' balance between didactic/interactive teaching: nine of 27 (33%) 'optimal' responses seen in 2013 compared with 23 of 29 (79%) in 2015 (P < 0.001). Commonly reported themes were: clinician facilitators and access to biostatisticians helped contextualise learning and small group, structured discussions provided an environment conducive to learning.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, radiation oncology trainees reported positive perceptions of the educational value of this programme, with feedback identifying areas where this resource might be improved. This model could readily be adapted to suit other medical disciplines and/or other training environments, using specialty-specific research to illuminate key statistical concepts.