Search

Working parents, and a rising number of adults delivering care for ageing relatives, experience numerous challenges in their personal, family, professional and financial lives due to multiple responsibilities. This study describes the experiences of Canadian radiation oncology (RO) parents and family caregivers, reporting challenges that may exist in providing family care with clinical/academic work commitments.Canadian RO's were invited to participate in an anonymous online survey, via RO heads of departments in cancer centres across Canada and to physician members of the Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology between November 2021 and January 2022. The survey focused on demographics, experiences of pregnancy and leave, parenting and adult caregiving responsibilities, and self-care.103 (38%) staff RO completed the survey, 78 (75.7%) identified as having a parental (76, 89.7%) and/or other family caregiver (8, 10.3%) role. 41% were female (59% male), with no difference between gender and number of children (median 2, IQR 1-3, p=0.17). More female respondents took parental leave for their first child compared to male (mean 29 versus 6 weeks, p0.001). 27% of male respondents who started caring for their first child during residency took parental leave compared to 77% (p=0.003) as a staff. The majority of respondents described "always/usually" collegial support for each pregnancy and parental leave. Both genders described parental responsibilities as negatively impacting attendance at conferences (male - 65%, female - 77%, p=0.31) and early/late work-related meetings (male - 76%, female 79%, p=1.0). More female respondents described parental responsibilities as negatively impacting their career (50% vs 29%, p=0.085). 52% of female respondents (vs 26% male respondents, p=0.044) identified a physician mentor or positive role model around parenting issues.Parental and other family caregiving responsibilities are not gender unique in Canadian ROs but competing work and family roles may impact genders differently.

This scoping review explored what is known about the experiences of informal cancer caregivers (CGs) who are newcomers with limited language proficiency. A literature search was performed in seven databases and the search yielded 11,289 articles. After duplicate removal and title and abstract screening, 216 articles underwent full text review and 57 articles and were synthesized. Most studies (n = 41, 72%) were qualitative and were published in North America (n = 35, 61%). Most CG participants were female (69%) and only 19 studies explicitly identified the CG country of origin. Of those that did, 26% originated from Asia, with most migrating from East Asia. Significant challenges were experienced by newcomer CGs and chief among these were related to communication challenges with HCPs that were exacerbated by a lack of availability of medical interpreters and the complexity of oncology health information. Efforts are needed to better integrate newcomer CGs into cancer care.

In order to mitigate low levels of health literacy among patients, there is need to evaluate patient education (PE) materials and to ensure that the information is readily accessible to patients. The quality and comprehensiveness of radiation therapy materials were evaluated at fourteen cancer centres. To assess quality, PE leaders independently conducted readability, actionability and understandability assessments of materials. To evaluate comprehensiveness, an assessment was conducted of the scope of symptoms covered in extant materials, and the modality they were produced in (e.g. pamphlet, video). A total of 555 PE materials were reviewed for comprehensiveness and modality and seventy underwent evaluation against health literacy best practice standards. Most materials (n = 64, 91%) had a reading grade level above the recommended grade 6 ([Formula: see text] = 9, range = 4-12). Under half (n = 34, 49%) scored at or above the 80% threshold for understandability ([Formula: see text] = 74%, 33-100%) and just over half (n = 36, 51%) scored at or above the 80% target for actionability ([Formula: see text] = 71%, 33-100%). Only two cancer centres (n = 2/14, 14%) had PE materials covering the breadth of symptoms related to radiation therapy and the vast majority of materials were pamphlets (89%). Findings indicate that most radiation therapy PE materials used in cancer centres do not meet health literacy best practices, and there is a disparity between cancer centres in the topics that are available to patients and family. This evaluation highlights the need to better incorporate health literacy best practices into the development of radiation therapy PE materials and strategies to improve accessibility of such health information.

Health information exchange between provider and patient, along with patient participation in their care (self-management), can lead to improved health outcomes. A step towards achieving better outcomes is the systematic provision of education materials to patients and caregivers throughout the cancer trajectory. An audit of patient education (PE) materials was conducted at a cancer center to identify content gaps and determine areas for future development. The PE audit was conducted in all outpatient clinics (13) and clinic-specific PE materials were identified, reviewed, and categorized by cancer type and under the following topics: About Cancer/Disease, Medical Tests and Imaging, Treatment, Symptom Management, Rehabilitation/Survivorship, General Wellbeing, Medical Device Care, Practical and Other. Four hundred forty-seven PE materials were included in the audit. Totals for each topic were summed and analyzed for education development opportunities. Results varied based on clinic and cancer type. Majority of the materials were found in the following clinics: Hematology (75), Genitourinary (74), and Gastrointestinal (57). The most common information topics were treatment (277), about cancer/disease (134), and symptom management (120). When broken down by cancer type, it was clear that while the collection of PE materials is well established for some diagnoses (e.g., 28 prostate cancer materials), there is a significant dearth in materials for others (e.g., 0 penile cancer materials). Audit results will be used to identify opportunities for future education material development. Determining cancer-specific information gaps is important in achieving equal information access for patients and caregivers, regardless of cancer diagnosis.

This study sought to report the degree to which postgraduate trainees in radiation oncology perceive their education has been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. A cross-sectional online survey was administered from June to July 2020 to trainee members of the Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology (CARO) (n = 203). Thirty-four trainees responded with a 17% response rate. Just under half of participants indicated that COVID-19 had a negative/very negative impact on training (n = 15; 46%). The majority agreed/strongly agreed that they feared family/loved ones would contract COVID-19 (n = 29, 88%), felt socially isolated from friends and family because of COVID-19 (n = 23, 70%), and had difficulty concentrating on tasks because of concerns about COVID-19 (n = 17, 52%). Changes that had a negative/very negative impact on learning included limitations to travel and networking (n = 31; 91%) and limited patient contact (n = 19; 58%). Virtual follow-ups (n = 25: 76%) and in-patient care activities (n = 12; 36%) increased. Electives were cancelled in province (n = 10; 30%), out-of-province (n = 16; 49%), and internationally (n = 15; 46%). Teaching from staff was moderately reduced to completely suppressed (n = 23, 70%) and teaching to medical students was moderately reduced to completely suppressed (n = 27, 82%). Significant changes to radiation oncology training were wrought by the pandemic, and roughly half of trainees perceive that these changes had a negative impact on training. Innovations in training delivery are needed to adapt to these new changes.

The rapidly increasing number of prostate cancer survivors in tandem with a forthcoming shortage of oncology specialists in our health system poses a barrier to ensuring that high-quality survivorship care is available to support this population. As such, there is a need to consider ways to optimize survivorship care, while taking health system constraints into account. The purpose of this study is to explore the perceptions of survivorship self-management between oncology specialists, primary care providers (PCPs), and survivors themselves.A single cross-sectional survey, relating to how prostate cancer survivorship care could be improved, was administered to each group.Two hundred forty-three participants (N = 206 survivors, N = 10 oncology specialists, N = 27 PCPs) completed the study survey. Most PCPs (90%) and oncology specialists (84%) perceived that an opportunity for prostate cancer survivors to have an expanded role in their care would be beneficial. Nearly half (49%) of survivors reported that it would be beneficial to have an expanded role in their survivorship care with only 11% indicating that it would not be beneficial at all.Barriers to developing this model involve limited oncology specialist time to execute survivorship plans, limited communication between oncology specialists and PCPs, and a lack of primary care and survivor education targeted specifically to prostate cancer survivorship.

Standard radiology reports (SRR) are designed to communicate information between doctors. With many patients having instantaneous access to SRRs on patient portals, interpretation without guidance from doctors can cause anxiety and panic. In this pilot study, we designed a patient-centred prostate MRI template report (PACERR) to address some of these challenges and tested whether PACERRs improve patient knowledge and experience.Patients booked for clinical prostate MRI were randomly assigned to SRR or SRR + PACERR. Questionnaires included multiple-choice that targeted 4 domains (understanding, usefulness, next steps, emotional experience) hypothesized to improve with patient-centred reports and short answer questions, testing knowledge regarding MRI results. Clinical encounters were observed and recorded to explore whether adding PACERR improved communication. Likert scaled-responses and short-answer questions were compared using Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis test.Of the 40 participants, the majority were MRI naïve (70%). Patients receiving a PACERR had higher scores in the categories of patient understanding (mean: 4.17 vs. 3.39, p=0.006), usefulness (mean: 4.58 vs. 3.07, p0.001), and identifying next steps (mean: 1.89 vs. 3.03, p=0.003) but not emotional experience (mean: 4.18 vs. 3.79, p=0.22). PACERR participants found the layout and design more patient friendly (mean: 4.47 vs. 2.61, p0.001) and easier to understand (mean: 4.37 vs. 2.38, p0.001). In the knowledge section, overall, the PACERR arm scored better (87% vs. 56%, p=0.004).With the addition of prostate MRI PACERR, participants had better understanding of their results and felt more prepared to involve themselves in discussions with their doctor.

Patient education (PE) is vital in reducing anxiety, increasing satisfaction with treatment, helping with self-management, and creating a sense of control for cancer patients. Patients access much of their material from health care providers through in-person visits, patient libraries, and in-person classes. Due to reductions in in-person visits throughout the pandemic, we sought to understand how PE programs responded under varying levels of COVID-19 restrictions to meet the information needs of patients and families. A cross-sectional survey was distributed to members of the Cancer Patient Education Network (CPEN) and the Health Care Education Association (HCEA) via the respective listservs. The survey consisted of five sections that included closed and opened questions. Participants were asked questions to describe their PE programs and how their duties were affected during the pandemic. Forty-two CPEN members completed the survey (N = 42, 66%) with a 35% response rate and a 55% completion rate, and 19 HCEA members completed the survey (N = 19, 30%) with a 5% response rate and 16% completion rate. The majority of staff surveyed were not furloughed (N = 57/64, 89%). Just under half reported a change in daily PE program activities (N = 23/52, 44%) and most reported a change in developing PE materials (e.g., pamphlets) (N = 10/26, 63%), finding information for patients/families (N = 11/19, 58%), and delivering classes (N = 12/21, 57%). COVID-19 has ushered in a new era in the delivery of PE with the rapid deployment of digital cancer patient education. Results can inform future directions for the delivery of PE post-pandemic.

Purpose Standard radiology reports (SRR) are designed to communicate information between doctors. With many patients having instantaneous access to SRRs on patient portals, interpretation without guidance from doctors can cause anxiety and panic. We designed a patient-centred prostate MRI template report (PACERR) to address some of these challenges and tested whether PACERRs improve patient knowledge and experience. Materials and Methods Patients booked for clinical prostate MRI were randomly assigned to SRR or SRR + PACERR. Questionnaires included multiple-choice that targeted 4 domains (understanding, usefulness, next steps, emotional experience) hypothesized to improve with patient-centred reports and short answer questions, testing knowledge regarding MRI results. Clinical encounters were observed and recorded to explore whether adding PACERR improved communication. Likert scaled-responses and short-answer questions were compared using Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis test. Results Of the 40 participants, the majority were MRI naïve (70%). Patients receiving a PACERR had higher scores in the categories of patient understanding (mean: 4.17 vs. 3.39, p=0.006), usefulness (mean: 4.58 vs. 3.07, p

Effective science communication is fundamental to closing the gap from research and innovation to clinical implementation. Existing paradigms of science communication are often challenged by a lack of skill and engagement, particularly from those who progress the science. Currently, a standardized curriculum on science communication, with global applicability, does not exist. The purpose of this project is to address the gap in training by health professionals and clinical researchers through the development of a globally relevant curriculum for science communication. The nominal group technique (NGT) was used whereby a convenience sample of eleven science communication experts from across the globe generated, discussed, and arrived at a consensus on topics that should be included in a standardized science communication curriculum. Experts represented diverse backgrounds within the health sciences. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and geographical constraints, the NGT was conducted virtually. The consensus-building methodology allowed for each expert to equally present ideas and collaborate with one another to create a robust and comprehensive curriculum for effective science communication. Expert panelists reached a consensus on 10 essential components of a standardized global science communication curriculum. Following the refinement of the curriculum topic areas, a virtual meeting with project co-investigators was held to review the topics and discuss relevance, applicability, and appeal to the local contexts. A standardized science communication curriculum is needed for health professionals and clinical researchers. The NGT achieved expert consensus on the core topics. The next steps are to develop the course ensuring optimal participation from learners across the globe.

Brachytherapy (BT) plays a fundamental role in the treatment of gynecological cancers. Patient education for vaginal self-management and dilator use post-BT involves an interdisciplinary team of healthcare professionals (HCPs) and there is a paucity of post-BT education guidelines. Our objective was to determine the educational needs of gynecological cancer patients surrounding vaginal self-management post-BT and to determine enablers and barriers to the provision of education by HCPs. This cross-sectional study recruited gynecological oncology patients receiving external beam radiotherapy and BT for curative intent. Patients completed a questionnaire to assess their vaginal self-management educational needs, preferred education modality, and desired timing of post-BT education. HCPs were invited to complete a questionnaire to identify enablers and barriers to providing BT education. Twenty patients and 53 HCPs participated. All patients rated each topic as very important/important with information about preventing vaginal stenosis as the most important overall (89%). When asked about topics they addressed during BT education, most HCPs reported that "explaining what vaginal stenosis is and the negative effects of stenosis" was always discussed with patients (N = 37/49, 77%). Barriers to providing post-BT education, including the patients' language and culture, as well as enablers, such as the use of written resources and tools for patients, were identified. Despite a high level of engagement, current education surrounding vaginal self-management post-BT may be inadequate.

BACKGROUND Cancer and its treatment are a major cause of morbidity and health care costs worldwide. While systemic therapies are highly effective, they are associated with toxicities that can be life-threatening and disabling if not managed effectively. Digital technologies hold promise for enabling patient self-management of treatment-related toxicities, but few programs have been developed using a co-design approach to ensure relevance and uptake. OBJECTIVE We undertook a user-centred co-design process in partnership with patients and other knowledge end-users to develop and iteratively test an evidence-based and theoretically informed web-based cancer self-management education program prototype (I-Can Manage). METHODS We developed the I-Can Manage web-based prototype based on human-centered and co-design methodologies. The content, features, and functions were informed by an initial qualitative inquiry discovery phase with patients diagnosed with lung, colorectal, and breast cancer followed by a persona and journey mapping workshop to further define content and desired features, and formalized usability (UI/UX) testing in a human factors digital We developed the I-Can Manage web-based prototype based on human-centered and co-design methodologies. The content, features, and functions were informed by an initial qualitative inquiry discovery phase with patients diagnosed with lung, colorectal, and breast cancer followed by a persona and journey mapping workshop to further define content and desired features, and formalized usability (UI/UX) testing in a human factors digital design lab. Five phases of co-design were followed to develop the components and features/functions of the web-based program. Patient partners and knowledge end-users were engaged in the co-design of the program to ensure relevance of components, features and functionalities, and to promote its uptake. design lab. Five phases of co-design were followed to develop the components and features/functions of the web-based program. Patient partners and knowledge end-users were engaged in the co-design of the program to ensure relevance of components, features and functionalities, and to promote its uptake. RESULTS In the qualitative discovery phase, participants described the “hard work” of managing cancer and their desire for an online program as a “a reliable source of trustworthy information” that would “normalize” their experience; and enable them to manage treatment side-effects and emotional consequences. In response to these issues, the theoretical underpinnings of social cognitive theory, self-efficacy, and self-management skills informed the components and features of I-Can Manage as an interactive online program. The program integrates information and evidence-based strategies for self-management of treatment toxicities and health-promoting behaviors in six e-learning modules (lay term-chapters), starting with an orientation to self-management and the central role of patients in managing cancer and treatment effects. Behavioral exercises, patient written and video stories, downloadable learning resources, and online completion of brief SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, time bound) goals and action plans were integrated across chapters to promote implementation of strategies specific to managing treatment effects and health behaviours to promote health recovery. Online functionalities were refined (e.g., number of clicks to access information) based on user experience testing (n=5) and scores on the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ) in a diverse cancer patient population. PSSUQ (mean total score: 3.75) suggests patient satisfaction with the usability of I-Can Manage program. CONCLUSIONS The I-Can Manage program, developed through co-design with patients, targets activation of patients in the use of core self-management skills, problem-specific self-management strategies, and health behaviours to manage cancer symptoms, treatment toxicities, emotional distress, and quality of life.

Every physician should be comfortable caring for cancer patients, yet medical education in oncology is known as inadequate. Our study explored this issue from an assessment perspective, by determining the representation of oncology and other health priorities in the clinical learning objectives for the Medical Council of Canada Qualifying Examination Part 1 (MCCQE Part 1). The Medical Council of Canada lists objectives for the MCCQE Part 1, based on CanMEDS roles for medical graduate competency. These objectives guide exam question development and can be used as a study guide for learners. Our study focused on the Medical Expert role and mapped the clinical objectives for oncologic, cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and chronic lower respiratory disease. The clinical objectives contained 190 topics under the Medical Expert role. Oncology content was found in 57 (30%), cardiovascular disease in 56 (29.5%), cerebrovascular disease in 21 (11%) and chronic lower respiratory disease in 7 (3.7%). In objectives with oncology content, gastrointestinal cancer (16, 28%), non-specific indicators of cancer (7, 12%) and genitourinary/musculoskeletal cancers (6, 10.5%) were most frequent. Content coding had inter-rater agreement greater than 99%, with kappas from 0.73 to 1.00. Oncology was highly represented in the clinical objectives listed for the MCCQE Part 1. With existing research showing limited oncology content on examinations and in medical curricula, our results were unexpected. This finding could signal the efficacy of initiatives seeking to improve oncology education and emphasizes the importance of continuing improvements in oncology education to meet patient and healthcare system needs.

Introduction: Prostate cancer survivors experience a multitude of late treatment effects, resulting in greater unmet needs, elevated symptom burden, and reduced quality of life. Survivors can engage in appropriate self-management strategies post-treatment to help reduce the symptom burden. The objectives of this study were to: 1) explore the unmet needs of prostate cancer survivors using the validated Cancer Survivor Unmet Needs instrument; 2) explore predictors of high unmet needs; and 3) explore prostate cancer survivors’ willingness to engage in self-management behaviors. Methods: Survivors were recruited from a prostate clinic and a cross-sectional survey design was employed. Inclusion criteria was having completed treatment two years prior. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize participant characteristics. Univariate and multivariate analyses were done to determine predictors of unmet needs and readiness to engage. Results: A total of 206 survivors participated in the study, with a mean age of 71 years. Most participants were university/college-educated (n=123, 61%) and had an annual household income of >$99 999 (n=74, 38%). Participants reported erectile dysfunction (81%) and nocturia (81%) as the most frequently experienced symptoms with the greatest symptom severity (x ̅=5.8 and x ̅=4.5, respectively). More accessible parking was the greatest unmet need in the quality-of-life domain (n=34/57, 60%). Overall, supportive care unmet needs were predicted by symptom severity on both univariate (p

The development of patient education (PE) materials is costly and resource-intensive, and no mechanisms exist for sharing materials across cancer centers/hospitals to limit duplicated effort. The aim of this study was to explore the incidence and cost implication of duplicated PE efforts.PE leaders from all (14) cancer centers in Ontario, Canada, submitted their collections of systemic therapy PE materials. Materials were categorized by topic and were coded as duplicate (more than one other material exists on the same topic and there was significant content and/or textual overlap), adapted (material was adapted from an existing material) or unique (no other material addresses the topic).304 materials were included and50 % of materials had duplicate content (n = 166, 55 %), a small proportion were adapted (n = 27, 9%), and less than half were unique (n = 111, 37 %). The majority of materials were considered amenable to adaptation meaning that the content was not dependent on a specific institutional context (n = 283, 93 %). The opportunity for cost savings if duplication of effort could be avoided is approximately $800 K for systemic therapy materials produced in cancer centers.There is need to refine the process for developing PE materials. Creating mechanisms of sharing can help facilitate equal access to materials and can result in significant cost savings.Efforts are needed to better coordinate the development of PE materials among patient educators. Better coordination would allow patient education programs to focus on other important challenges.

The Internet is widely used for accessing COVID-19 information and while abundant, it is frequently complex, inconsistent, and contradictory. This “misinfodemic” has repeatedly revealed low health ...

Background: In response to evidence about the health benefits of smoking cessation at time of cancer diagnosis, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) (OH-CCO) instructed Regional Cancer Centres (RCC) to implement smoking cessation interventions (SCI). RCCs were given flexibility to implement SCIs according to their context but were required to screen new patients for tobacco status, advise patients about the importance of quitting, and refer patients to cessation supports. The purpose of this evaluation was to identify practices that influenced successful implementation across RCCs. Methods: A realist evaluation approach was employed. Realist evaluations examine how underlying processes of an intervention (mechanisms) in specific settings (contexts) interact to produce results (outcomes). A realist evaluation may thus help to generate an understanding of what may or may not work across contexts. Results: The RCCs with the highest Tobacco Screening Rates used a centralized system. Regarding the process for advising and referring, three RCCs offered robust smoking cessation training, resulting in advice and referral rates between 80% and 100%. Five RCCs surpassed the target for Accepted Referral Rates, acceptance rates for internal referral were highest overall. Conclusion: Findings highlight factors that may influence successful SCI implementation.

Sickle cell disease patients commonly present to an emergency department (ED) due to acute vaso-occlusive pain episodes (VOEs), also known as vaso-occlusive crises (VOCs). Unsatisfactory patient care leads to preventable morbidity, mortality, and substantial financial costs. This study investigated the current use of sickle cell disease patient-directed physician education (PDPE) in the clinical setting and also explored opportunities for improvement. A qualitative phenomenologic design was used with semi-structured in-depth interviews. Open-ended questions were used to probe participant's experiences with EDs, the feasibility of a PDPE program as well as barriers and facilitators to PDPE. A total of nine patients and eight physicians participated in the study. Three major themes were identified: divergent challenges to patient recommendations, new targets for sickle cell disease education and triage process: not heard and not seen. Numerous challenges exist to the implementation and optimization of PDPE with sickle cell disease triage processes and nursing support identified as influential factors. Paramount to the process of improving PDPE is physicians perceiving patients as credible sources of information, especially as it relates to generalized concerns of opioid dosing. A patient provided written or digital education tool can be considered to facilitate PDPE to ease communication strain on patients while increasing communication efficiency.

Most patients diagnosed with cancer are administered systemic therapy and these patients are counselled and given printed education (PE) materials. High rates of low health literacy highlight the need to evaluate the quality of these PE materials. A current state assessment of the quality of PE materials was conducted in Ontario, Canada. Patient education leaders from 14 cancer centres submitted print materials on the topic of systemic cancer therapy to the assessment team. To report adherence to PE quality and health literacy best practices, the following validated measures were used: readability (FRY, SMOG and Flesch Reading Ease), understandability and actionability (Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT)). Materials at grade level 6 or lower and with PEMAT scores greater than 80% were considered to meet health literacy best practices. A total of 1146 materials were submitted; 366 met inclusion criteria and 83 were selected for assessment. Most materials scored below the 80% target for understandability (x = 73%, 31–100%) and actionability (x = 68%, 20–100%), and above the recommended grade 6 readability level (x = grade 9) meaning that the majority did not meet quality standards or best practices. Results suggest that there is significant opportunity to improve the quality of PE materials distributed by cancer centres. The quality of PE materials is a critical safety and equity consideration when these materials convey important safety and self-care directives.

The study aim was to evaluate the costs associated with developing and reviewing patient education materials (pamphlets) across Ontario cancer centers. While patient education often produces a positive return on investment, limited efforts have been dedicated to optimizing the personnel, time, and capital dedicated to this feat across healthcare systems. Patient education leaders at 14 cancer centers completed a survey measure, estimating the number of hours spent developing and reviewing pamphlets and identifying the personnel involved in each procedural step. The time expended per center in each step was then combined with average salary data for the identified personnel to derive total cost estimates. Cancer centers spend on average $5672 (SD = $3180) developing (M = $4560, SD = $2620) and reviewing (M = $1112, SD = $654) one pamphlet. This cumulates to an average per annum spending of $65,401 (SD = $75,494) for pamphlet development and $19,819 (SD = $28,524) for annual pamphlet review at each cancer center. The cost and number of hours spent developing and reviewing pamphlets varied substantially between cancer centers. While the security of budgets for patient education varies across cancer centers, opportunities to optimize human capital and monetary resources should be considered. Results of the study can be used to advocate for sustainable investment into cancer education programs, improve the coordination of educational materials production and review, and ensure that resource quality and access are consistent across the province.

Several studies have examined the informational needs of patients undergoing the breast diagnostic process where needs are highest during testing and prior to receiving a diagnosis. To aid in the development of an education pathway, we identified patient information needs. A multi-method approach to identify areas of need and to understand when and how information should be provided to patients was undertaken. The methods included an environmental scan of consumer health information, ethnographic observation of the patient clinical experience, key informant interviews, and a needs assessment survey. The data collected from the environmental scan, ethnography, and interviews were used to develop the items in the survey. The survey was developed around four domains: (1) Medical Procedures and Tests, (2) Understanding the Rapid Diagnostic Process, (3) Breast Cancer and Other Breast Conditions, and (4) Support and Coping. A total of 101 patients completed the survey. Mean importance scores were significantly different between domains of information need (p

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., Purpose The aim of this scoping review is to understand the motivations for the creation of global medical curricula, summarize methods that have been used to create these curricula, and understand the perceived premises for the creation of these curricula. Method In 2018, the authors used a comprehensive search strategy to identify papers on existing efforts to create global medical curricula published from 1998 to March 29, 2018, in the following databases: MEDLINE; MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process, and Other Non-Indexed Citations; Embase; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; PsycINFO; CINAHL; ERIC; Scopus; African Index Medicus; and LILACS. There were no language restrictions. Two independent researchers applied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Demographic data were abstracted from publications and summarized. The stated purposes, methods used for the development, stated motivations, and reported challenges of curricula were coded. Results Of the 18,684 publications initially identified, 137 met inclusion criteria. The most common stated purposes for creating curricula were to define speciality-specific standards (50, 30%), to harmonize training standards (38, 23%), and to improve the quality or safety of training (31, 19%). The most common challenges were intercountry variation (including differences in health care systems, the operationalization of medical training, and sociocultural differences; 27, 20%), curricular implementation (20, 15%), and the need for a multistakeholder approach (6, 4%). Most curricula were developed by a social group (e.g., committee; 30, 45%) or Delphi or modified Delphi process (22, 33%). Conclusions The challenges of intercountry variation, the need for a multistakeholder approach, and curricular implementation need to be considered if concerns about curricular relevance are to be addressed. These challenges undoubtedly impact the uptake of global medical curricula and can only be addressed by explicit efforts to make curricula applicable to the realities of diverse health care settings.

Effective communication between healthcare providers (HCPs) and patients is important for HCP well-being, patient engagement, and health outcomes. Yet, HCPs do not receive adequate communication skills training and report feeling unprepared for difficult conversations. A needs assessment of 64 cancer HCP trainees in Toronto, Canada, found that a majority of trainees rated themselves with low competency in communication skills to support patients through difficult conversations, while nearly all rated these skills as important to their practice. A blended multiprofessional communications program was developed including online theoretical learning and reflective practice in addition to in-person simulation with standardised patient actors. Since communication skills mastery is highly unlikely to occur at the termination of a single training program, the goal of the program was to stimulate participants’ motivational beliefs about difficult conversations communication skills in order to deepen their commitment to learning and mastery. The motivational beliefs assessed included self-efficacy (self-perceived competence), intent to use techniques learned, and confidence in task mastery. After completing the course, participants’ self-perceived competence in dealing with difficult conversations significantly increased by an average of 25 points (p

Introduction: Training in humanism provides skills important for improving the quality of care received by patients, achieving shared decision-making with patients, and navigating systems-level challenges. However, because of the dominance of the biomedical model, there is potentially a lack of attention to humanistic competencies in global oncology curricula. In the present study, we aimed to explore the incorporation of humanistic competencies into global oncology curricula. Methods: This analysis considered 17 global oncology curricula. A curricular item was coded as either humanistic (as defined by the iecares framework) or non-humanistic. If identified as humanistic, the item was coded using an aspect of humanism, such as Altruism, from the iecares framework. All items, humanistic and not, were coded under the canmeds framework using 1 of the 7 canmeds competency domains: Medical Expert, Communicator, Collaborator, Leader, Scholar, Professional, or Health Advocate. Results: Of 7792 identified curricular items in 17 curricula, 780 (10%) aligned with the iecares humanism framework. The proportion of humanistic items in individual curricula ranged from 2% to 26%, and the proportion increased from 3% in the oldest curricula to 11% in the most recent curricula. Of the humanistic items, 35% were coded under Respect, 31% under Compassion, 24% under Empathy, 5% under Integrity, 2% under Excellence, 1% under Altruism, and 1% under Service. Within the canmeds domains, the humanistic items aligned mostly with Professional (35%), Medical Expert (31%), or Communicator (25%). Conclusions: The proportion of humanistic competencies has been increasing in global oncology curricula over time, but the overall proportion remains low and represents a largely Western perspective on what constitutes humanism in health care. The representation of humanism focuses primarily on the iecares attributes of Respect, Compassion, and Empathy.

Background: The objective of this study was to determine if search request forms, which are used when a patron’s request for information cannot be fulfilled at the time of contact with the library team, can be used to identify gaps in consumer health library collections.Case Presentation: Search request forms were collected from 2013 to 2020 and analyzed independently by two reviewers. Search request forms were included if they were complete and contained a record of how the request was fulfilled. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patron characteristics. Search request forms were iteratively coded to identify themes in the data and determine if resources provided to patrons could be found within the library collection. The study team subsequently reviewed search request forms to determine reasons for identified gaps. Two hundred and forty-nine search request forms were analyzed. Six main content themes were identified: 1) understanding the cancer diagnosis, 2) cancer treatments, 3) understanding disease prognosis, 4) support during and after treatment, 5) natural health products and therapeutic effects in oncology, and 6) research literature. The majority of patrons were patients (53%). Over half (60%) of the submitted search request forms reflected collection gaps, and many (16%) contained queries for information about rare cancer diagnoses. The main reason that queries could not be satisfied was that there was limited consumer health information on the requested topics (53%).Conclusions: Search request forms are a useful resource for assessing gaps in consumer health library collections.

IntroductionConsiderable observational evidence suggests that cancer online support groups reduce feelings of isolation, depression and anxiety, enhance coping and self-management, and lead to better informed patients. Other studies indicate that cancer online support groups can increase distress. Yet no studies theorise the complex, context-dependent mechanisms by which cancer online support groups generate their—sometimes contrasting—outcomes.Methods and analysisGuided by an integrated knowledge translation approach and the strategy for patient-oriented research, we will conduct a realist review of cancer online support groups in partnership with stakeholders. We will follow Pawson’s five steps and existing quality standards to develop a program theory that explains how cancer online support groups work, for whom and in what circumstances. The specific research questions will be: what positive and negative outcomes have been reported on cancer online support groups? What are the mechanisms that are associated with these outcomes, in which contexts and for whom? Through a rigorous review of relevant scientific and grey literature, as well as ongoing dialogue with stakeholders, a program theory will be developed to explain who benefits from cancer online support groups and who does not, what benefits they derive (or do not), and the factors that affect these outcomes.Ethics and disseminationThe use of secondary data for this review precludes the need for ethical approval. Dissemination will be informed by the knowledge-to-action framework and will consist of tailored knowledge products that are conceived of collaboratively with stakeholders. These will include peer-reviewed publications on how cancer online support groups can be optimised and best practice recommendations to maximise the benefits experienced by people with cancer. These traditional scientific outputs, along with their respective evidence summaries, will be amplified through strategic social media events hosted and promoted by knowledge users.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021250046.

Geriatric assessment (GA) provides information on key health domains of older adults and is recommended to help inform cancer treatment decisions and cancer care. However, GA is not feasible in many health institutions due to lack of geriatric staff and/or resources. To increase accessibility to GA and improve treatment decision making for older adults with cancer (≥65 years), we developed a self-reported, electronic geriatric assessment tool: Comprehensive Assessment for My Plan (CHAMP).Older adults with cancer were invited to join user-centered design sessions to develop the layout and content of the tool. Subsequently, they participated in usability testing to test the usability of the tool (ease of use, acceptability, etc.). Design sessions were also conducted with oncology clinicians (oncologists and nurses) to develop the tool's clinician interface. GA assessment questions and GA recommendations were guided by a systematic review and Delphi expert panel.A total of seventeen older adults participated in the study. Participants were mainly males (82.4%) and 75% were aged 75 years and older. Nine oncology clinicians participated in design sessions. Older adults and clinicians agreed that the tool was user-friendly. Domains in the final CHAMP tool (with questions and recommendations) included functional status, falls risk, cognitive impairment, nutrition, medication review, social supports, depression, substance use disorder, and miscellaneous items.CHAMP was designed for use by older adults and oncologists and may enhance access to GA for older adults with cancer. The next phase of the CHAMP study will involve field validation in oncology clinics.