Back

Enhancing Radiation Oncology Training through Patient Advocate Integration

Simone-Soule, C. A.; Burke, S. E.; Abul-Enin, D.; Kunta, C.; Adekeye, A.; Tran, P.; Leader, A.; Simone, N. L.

2025-07-28 medical education
10.1101/2025.07.28.25332319 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposePatient advocates represent the voice of the patient community and bring a unique perspective to research. We hypothesized that including patient advocates in research training would increase trainees ability to communicate their science, understand the impact of their work and increase their empathy for patients. MethodsAn IRB-approved survey was administered to assess the impact of patient advocate feedback on trainees who presented their research via posters at our Radiation Oncology Research Symposium. Trainees reported demographics and self-assessed their use of lay language, changes in empathy, understanding the impact of their research, and potential future implications. The binomial proportion test and Fishers exact test were used to determine significance. ResultsThe survey was completed by 80% (28/35) of trainees who participated in the poster session and interacted with patient advocates. Trainees were predominantly younger (60.7% under 30yo) and people of color (60.7%). Almost all trainees (96.4%) were comfortable talking to advocates but only 89.29% were comfortable using lay language. Trainees agreed (75%) that interacting with advocates increased their empathy. Most trainees (71.4%) believed patient advocates helped them understand the significance of their research and 64.3% believed advocates helped them develop new research ideas. Most trainees would like advocates at future poster presentations (85.7%), but did not want them to participate in study design or analysis. Gender and training level did not affect trainees ability to communicate in lay language, their empathy for patients, or understanding of their works clinical relevance. ConclusionsIncluding patient advocates in poster sessions may improve trainees ability to present their research in lay language, increase their empathy and understand the clinical impact of their research. Future radiation oncology training should consider including the patient advocate voice to improve the tangible connection between research and real-world impact.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.