A scoping review of medical education research for residents in radiation oncology

Assessing the Landscape in Medical Education Literature in Medical Oncology: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

Medical oncology and medical education (ME) have both expanded exponentially over the past 50 years; thus, it is important to understand the current status of postgraduate medical oncology education and develop ways to advance this field. This study undertakes a scoping review of ME literature in medical oncology to inform future scholarship in this area.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, ERIC, and Web of Science were searched to find peer-reviewed English language articles on postgraduate ME in medical oncology published from 2009 to 2020. Established scoping review methodologies were used in study design; articles were classified by specialty, learner training level, region of authorship, institution type, year of publication, journal type, study methodology, and research topic. Curriculum intervention, scholarship, and domain(s) of physician competency were also assessed. The results were interpreted using descriptive statistics and collated using predetermined conceptual frameworks.

RESULTS

A total of 2,959 references were initially found across four databases. After title and abstract screening, 305 articles remained; after full-text review, 144 articles were included in final analysis. Postgraduate medical oncology education research is increasing, with the majority of articles published in North America. Quantitative studies were most common, primarily survey approaches. For physician competencies, professionalism and medical expertise comprised the large majority of article focuses, whereas very few articles addressed leadership or health advocacy. Curriculum development, professional development, and communication skills were dominant research themes while no articles discussed teacher training.

CONCLUSION

Although areas such as professionalism and communication skills are well-studied, medical oncology ME research is lacking in leadership, health advocacy, and teacher training. This study provides valuable guidance for future ME research in medical oncology and establishes a benchmark to examine changes in educational scholarship over time.

Scoping reviews in medical education: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Over the last two decades, the number of scoping reviews in core medical education journals has increased by 4200%. Despite this growth, research on scoping reviews provides limited information about their nature, including how they are conducted or why medical educators undertake this knowledge synthesis type. This gap makes it difficult to know where the field stands and may hamper attempts to improve the conduct, reporting and utility of scoping reviews. Thus, this review characterises the nature of medical education scoping reviews to identify areas for improvement and highlight future research opportunities.

METHOD

The authors searched PubMed for scoping reviews published between 1/1999 and 4/2020 in 14 medical education journals. The authors extracted and summarised key bibliometric data, the rationales given for conducting a scoping review, the research questions and key reporting elements as described in the PRISMA-ScR. Rationales and research questions were mapped to Arksey and O'Malley's reasons for conducting a scoping review.

RESULTS

One hundred and one scoping reviews were included. On average, 10.1 scoping reviews (SD = 13.1, median = 4) were published annually with the most reviews published in 2019 (n = 42). Authors described multiple reasons for undertaking scoping reviews; the most prevalent being to summarise and disseminate research findings (n = 77). In 11 reviews, the rationales for the scoping review and the research questions aligned. No review addressed all elements of the PRISMA-ScR, with few authors publishing a protocol (n = 2) or including stakeholders (n = 20). Authors identified shortcomings of scoping reviews, including lack of critical appraisal.

CONCLUSIONS

Scoping reviews are increasingly conducted in medical education and published by most core journals. Scoping reviews aim to map the depth and breadth of emerging topics; as such, they have the potential to play a critical role in the practice, policy and research of medical education. However, these results suggest improvements are needed for this role to be fully realised.

Clinical research mentorship programme (CRMP) for radiation oncology residents in Africa-building capacity through mentoring

Research skills are mandatory for all oncology residency training programmes. Creating the environment to foster skills and passion can be a challenge in all settings, and a unique challenge in low and middle income countries (LMICs). Tremendous clinical workload places exceptional demand on clinician teachers, research infrastructure and access to research collaborators with diverse methodological skill sets can be limited. International collaborations, and in particular relationship partnerships (Whitehead et al ((2018) Acad Med 93 1760-1763)) can be a useful approach to bridge resource gaps and enrich the support available to trainees (Research EoH ((2014) TDR/ESSENCE/2.14)). The Clinical Research Mentorship Programme (CRMP) is a collaborative initiative created by the University of Toronto Department of Radiation Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, delivered in collaboration with LMIC radiation oncology residency programmes with the primary goal of enriching the research experience of LMIC oncology trainees. It was inspired by observing a need, an enthusiasm to collaborate and some seed funding that supported the idea. At the heart of the programme is a formalised relationship, a triad, between a LMIC oncology trainee, their local supervisor and a mentor from Toronto. Within the collaborative environment created between the LMIC and high income country (HIC) institutions, enabled by remote learning technologies, a 12-week research methods seminar kick starts a year-long mentorship for the trainee on their research question. The goal is to enrich the quality of the research experience for the trainee, resulting in dissemination of research findings in international conferences and publications. A standard evaluation package is used (Vuple et al ((2021) 6 919-928)). In this paper, through a description of our collaboration, we will highlight how a distant mentorship programme was used to enhance clinical research mentorship skills for radiation oncology trainees in Africa. We hope the format we have chosen will continue to demonstrate effectiveness for our trainees, sustainability for our faculty and institutions and will serve as one mechanism to build radiation capacity for LMIC through collaboration, mentorship and research.