MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280488570 · doi:10.1200/go.22.00017

Oncology Training Needs Assessment Among Health Care Professionals in Nigeria

2022· article· en· W4280488570 on OpenAlexaff
Prisca Olabisi Adejumo, Mojisola Oluwasanu, Atara Ntekim, Olutosin Awolude, Olayinka Kotila, Toyin Aniagwu, Biobele J. Brown, Bonaventure Suiru Dzekem, Susan Duncan, Moyinoluwalogo M. Tito-Ilori, Olufadekemi Ajani, Sang Mee Lee, Chinedum P. Babalola, Oladosu Ojengbede, Dezheng Huo, Nazik Hammad, Olufunmilayo I. Olopade

Bibliographic record

VenueJCO Global Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvances in Oncology and Radiotherapy
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Cancer InstituteAtara BiotherapeuticsUniversity of ChicagoGenentechBreast Cancer Research Foundation
KeywordsTraining (meteorology)Health professionalsMedicineNeeds assessmentMedical educationHealth careNursingFamily medicineGeographyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE This study investigated the status of training and preparedness for oncology practice and research and degree of interprofessional collaboration among health care professionals in the six geopolitical regions of Nigeria. METHODS A convergent parallel mixed methods design was used. Three hundred seventeen respondents completed a three-part, online questionnaire. Self-rated competencies in oncology research (26 items), oncology practice (16 items), and interprofessional collaboration (nine items) were assessed with a one- to five-point Likert scale. Six key informant and 24 in-depth interviews were conducted. Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance, and pairwise t-test were used to analyze the quantitative data, whereas thematic analysis was used for the qualitative data. RESULTS Respondents were mostly female (65.6%) with a mean age of 40.5 ± 8.3 years. Respondents include 178 nurses (56.2%), 93 medical doctors (29.3%), and 46 pharmacists (14.5%). Self-assessed competencies in oncology practice differed significantly across the three groups of health care professionals ( F = 4.789, P = .009). However, there was no significant difference across professions for competency in oncology research ( F = 1.256, P = .286) and interprofessional collaboration ( F = 1.120, P = .327). The majority of respondents (267, 82.4%) felt that educational opportunities in oncology-associated research in the country are inadequate and that this has implications for practice. Key training gaps reported include poor preparedness in data analysis and bioinformatics (138, 43.5%), writing clinical trials (119, 37.5%), and writing grant/research proposals (105, 33.1%). Challenges contributing to gaps in cancer research include few trained oncology specialists, low funding for research, and inadequate interprofessional collaboration. CONCLUSION This study highlights gaps in oncology training and practice and an urgent need for interventions to enhance interprofessional training to improve quality of cancer care in Nigeria. These would accelerate progress toward strengthening the health care system and reducing global disparities in cancer outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.453 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCO Global OncologySame topicAdvances in Oncology and RadiotherapyFrench-language works237,207