Mapping the Current State of Canadian Medical School Oncology Interest Groups

Medical Student Leadership in the Student Oncology Society: Evaluation of a Student-Run Interest Group

At our institution, we aim to foster interest in oncology through the Student Oncology Society (SOS). The SOS was formed in 2010 and since then has hosted numerous oncology-related events, such as career panels, patient survivorship celebrations, and movie screenings. The purpose of this study is to report the experiences from former student leaders of the SOS, particularly how their participation informed their career choice. Complete survey responses were obtained from 26 of 32 former SOS student leaders (response rate 81.3%). Out of the 26 respondents, 19 (73.1%) are pursuing an oncology-related specialty. The three most common competencies that were affected by participation in SOS, noted by 21 (80.8%) respondents, were learning about pathways to careers in oncology, understanding the multidisciplinary approach to cancer care, and coordinating events. By mean Likert score, the most important factors in career choice for respondents who eventually pursued an oncology field were having a mentor in oncology (4.44), a clinical rotation in oncology (4.31), research involvement (4.22), and SOS involvement (3.17). While SOS involvement played a role in career choice among our student leaders, having a mentor was cited to be the most important factor for choosing an oncology career. Thus, implementation of formal mentorship initiatives within the framework of oncology interest groups should be explored.

Representation of Women in Canadian Radiation Oncology Trainees and Radiation Oncologists: Progress or Regress?

Purpose

Methods and Materials

Results

Conclusions

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.