MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406539044 · doi:10.1186/s40959-025-00304-x

Nursing knowledge in cardio-oncology: results of an international learning needs-assessment survey

2025· article· en· W4406539044 on OpenAlexaff
Anecita Fadol, Geraldine Lee, Valerie Shelton, Kelly C. Schadler, Adib Younus, Mary Stuart, Lisa Nodzon, Edith Pituskin

Bibliographic record

VenueCardio-Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity and mitigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOncologyInternal medicineSpecialtyCertificationOncology nursingModalitiesFamily medicineNursingNurse education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: With early detection and improvements in systemic and local therapies, millions of people are surviving cancer, but for some at a high cost. In some cancer types, cardiovascular disease now competes with recurrent cancer as the cause of death. Traditional care models, in which the cardiologist or oncologist assess patients individually, do not address complex cancer and cardiovascular needs. Nursing disciplines should be an integral part of holistic assessment in cardio-oncology care. To learn what educational needs nurses perceive important for provision of competent cardio-oncology nursing care, we undertook an international survey, aiming to understand their learning needs and preferred learning modalities. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was developed by members of the International Cardio-Oncology Society (IC-OS) Nursing Research group. The survey was in English and consisted of 23 questions which include demographic information, clinical specialty (oncology, cardiology, or cardio-oncology), multiple-choice questions related to clinical topics that nurses might be interested in learning, and preferred methods of instruction. RESULTS: Three hundred and twenty-nine responses were received. The majority expressed interest in learning more about cardio-oncology related topics, primarily via pre-recorded webinars (n = 206, 67%) and live virtual meetings (n = 192, 63%). Formal programs leading to certification were highly endorsed (n = 247, 80%). In relation to specific cardio-oncology topics, there was a strong interest in learning more about specific cardiovascular toxicities, and their monitoring and management (n = 205, 66%). CONCLUSION: Cardio-oncology is a new field of expertise requiring competent nurses with current knowledge incorporating both specialties. The survey we conducted described the sample's characteristics, identified cardio-oncology learning needs and preferred methods of delivery. A cardio-oncology core curriculum based on the survey responses can offer convenient, accessible and learner-directed education for nurses worldwide. Ultimately, development of cardio-oncology nursing expertise will benefit cancer patients and survivors worldwide.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.701
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardio-OncologySame topicChemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity and mitigationFrench-language works237,207