Critical reviews in oncology/hematology · 2026
Research training in radiation oncology: a scoping review of global pathways, barriers and enablers.
СтатьяScoping ReviewНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kucharczak Joanna, Irodi Anushka, Spencer Katie, Walls Gerard M, Jones Christopher M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There is a disparity between the importance of radiation oncology (RO) to cancer care and the research activity that underpins it. This may relate to inadequate availability of, or barriers within, residency research training. This scoping review sought to characterize the barriers and enablers to RO research training, and to summarize relevant training pathways.
METHODS: Systematic Medline and Embase searches were conducted using "RO", "Исследование", "training", and related terms, to identify reports published between 2010 and 2025. Manuscripts were screened using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria to select those describing research initiatives, and barriers and enablers to resident-level research. These features were extracted along with country of origin and study design parameters.
RESULTS: Of 1745 identified manuscripts, 54 were included. Most reports originated from North America (n = 24/54; 44.4 %), Europe (n = 12/54; 22.2 %) and Australasia (n = 8/54; 14.8 %). A majority were survey-based studies (n = 27/54; 50.0 %) or observational cohort analyses (n = 10/54; 18.5 %). We identified seven countries with mandated resident-level research training and three regions/countries with RO-specific physician scientist training programs. These varied from integrated training schemes that include higher research degree completion, to short-interval initiatives. Five programs were supported by metrics detailing their impact. Reported enablers and barriers demonstrated a subtle geographic variation but included protected time and funding, mentorship and attainment of research skills.
CONCLUSION: There is global variation in research training during RO residency but numerous shared enablers and barriers. These data provide shared best practice and a scaffold on which national and international societies can build improved research training pathways to redress the radiation research deficit.
METHODS: Systematic Medline and Embase searches were conducted using "RO", "Исследование", "training", and related terms, to identify reports published between 2010 and 2025. Manuscripts were screened using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria to select those describing research initiatives, and barriers and enablers to resident-level research. These features were extracted along with country of origin and study design parameters.
RESULTS: Of 1745 identified manuscripts, 54 were included. Most reports originated from North America (n = 24/54; 44.4 %), Europe (n = 12/54; 22.2 %) and Australasia (n = 8/54; 14.8 %). A majority were survey-based studies (n = 27/54; 50.0 %) or observational cohort analyses (n = 10/54; 18.5 %). We identified seven countries with mandated resident-level research training and three regions/countries with RO-specific physician scientist training programs. These varied from integrated training schemes that include higher research degree completion, to short-interval initiatives. Five programs were supported by metrics detailing their impact. Reported enablers and barriers demonstrated a subtle geographic variation but included protected time and funding, mentorship and attainment of research skills.
CONCLUSION: There is global variation in research training during RO residency but numerous shared enablers and barriers. These data provide shared best practice and a scaffold on which national and international societies can build improved research training pathways to redress the radiation research deficit.