| Title |
The Consequences of Diminishing Industry Support on the Independent Education Landscape: An Evidence-Based Analysis of the Perceived and Realistic Impact on Professional Development and Patient Care Among Oncologists
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Cancer Education, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13187-014-0664-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Caroline Robinson, John Ruggiero, Mazi Abdolrasulnia, B. Stephen Burton |
| Abstract |
In recent years, commercial funding for continuing medical education (CME) has dropped significantly. Yet, little has been written about how this might affect CME in oncology, a field in which new drugs and advances emerge at a rapid pace. This study examines the role oncologists and oncology fellows say that CME plays in their ongoing professional development and their attitudes about the potential and realistic impact upon both the dissemination of medical information and the impact on patient care if commercial support were removed from CME. The study is based upon a national survey of 368 oncology clinicians (283 oncologists and 85 oncology fellows). Respondents indicated that CME is an important part of their ongoing professional development. The majority of oncologists (90 %) and oncology fellows (78 %) "agreed" or "strongly agreed" that commercial support may be more necessary for oncology than for other specialties due to the rate at which cancer therapies are introduced. Respondents felt loss of commercial support would impact cost, format, and availability of oncology CME programs. Half of oncologists thought eliminating commercial support for CME would have a negative impact on application of new therapies in oncology. Yet, both oncologists and oncology fellows were reluctant to claim the removal of commercial support would negatively affect the practice of evidence-based medicine, patient outcomes, or patient safety. A possible explanation of this apparent contradiction is found in the social sciences literature. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 50% |
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 19% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 12% |
| Other | 5 | 19% |
| Unknown | 3 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 35% |
| Psychology | 5 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 June 2014.
All research outputs
#14,195,754
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Education
#507
of 1,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,466
of 227,058 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Education
#13
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,128 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 227,058 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.