IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0159146.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Medical Oncologist Residents Think about the Italian Speciality Schools: A Survey of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) on Educational, Clinical and Research Activities

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Moretti
  • Michele Ghidini
  • Carmine De Angelis
  • Matteo Lambertini
  • Chiara Cremolini
  • Martina Imbimbo
  • Rossana Berardi
  • Massimo Di Maio
  • Stefano Cascinu
  • Nicla La Verde

Abstract

Background and objectives: Relevant heterogeneity exists among Postgraduate Schools in Medical Oncology, also within the same country. In order to provide a comprehensive overview of the landscape of Italian Postgraduate Schools in Medical Oncology, the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) undertook an online survey, inviting all the residents to describe their daily activities and to express their overall satisfaction about their programs. Methods: A team composed of five residents and three consultants in medical oncology prepared a 38 items questionnaire that was published online in a reserved section, accessible through a link sent by e-mail. Residents were invited to anonymously fill in the questionnaire that included the following sub-sections: quality of teaching, clinical and research activity, overall satisfaction. Results: Three-hundred and eleven (57%) out of 547 invited residents filled in the questionnaire. Two-hundred and twenty-three (72%) participants declared that attending lessons was frequently difficult and 153 (49%) declared they did not gain substantial improvement in their knowledge from them. Fifty-five percent stated that they did not receive lessons on palliative care. Their overall judgment about didactic activity was low in 63% of the interviewed. The satisfaction for clinical activity was in 86% of cases good: 84% recognized that, during the training period, they acquired a progressive independence on patients' management. About research activity, the majority (79%) of participants in the survey was actively engaged in managing patients included in clinical trials but the satisfaction level for the involvement in research activities was quite low (54%). Overall, 246 residents (79%) gave a positive global judgment of their Medical Oncology Schools. Conclusions: The landscape of Italian Postgraduate Schools in Medical Oncology is quite heterogeneous across the country. Some improvements in the organization of teaching and in the access to research opportunity are needed; the perception about clinical activity and the overall judgment of the programs are quite satisfactory.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Moretti & Michele Ghidini & Carmine De Angelis & Matteo Lambertini & Chiara Cremolini & Martina Imbimbo & Rossana Berardi & Massimo Di Maio & Stefano Cascinu & Nicla La Verde, 2016. "What Medical Oncologist Residents Think about the Italian Speciality Schools: A Survey of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) on Educational, Clinical and Research Activities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-10, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0159146
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159146
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0159146
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0159146&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0159146?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0159146. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.