Bryant Ashley Leak, Krok-Schoen Jessica L, Cobran Ewan K, Greer Joseph A, Temel Jennifer S, Pirl William F
School of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Cancer Research Training Education Coordination, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Palliat Support Care. 2024 Aug;22(4):649-654. doi: 10.1017/S1478951522001432.
Since 2015, the Harvard Workshop on Research Methods in Supportive Oncology has trained early-career investigators in skills to develop rigorous studies in supportive oncology. This study examines workshop evaluations over time in the context of two factors: longitudinal participant feedback and a switch from in-person to virtual format during the COVID pandemic.
We examined post-workshop evaluations for participants who attended the workshop from 2015 to 2021. We qualitatively analyzed evaluation free text responses on ways in which the workshop could be improved and "other comments." Potential areas of improvement were categorized and frequencies were compiled longitudinally. Differences in participants' ratings of the workshop and demographics between in-person and virtual formats were investigated with -tests and Chi-square tests, respectively.
286 participants attended the workshop over 8 years. Participant ratings of the workshop remained consistently high without substantial variation across all years. Three main themes emerged from the "other comments" item: (1) sense of community; (2) passion and empowerment; and (3) value of protected time. Participants appeared to identify fewer areas for improvement over time. There were no significant differences in participant ratings or demographics between the in-person and virtual formats.
While the workshop has experienced changes over time, participant evaluations varied little. The core content and structure might have the greatest influence on participants' experiences.
自2015年以来,哈佛支持性肿瘤学研究方法研讨会对早期职业研究人员进行了培训,以培养他们开展支持性肿瘤学严谨研究的技能。本研究在两个因素的背景下,随着时间推移考察了研讨会评估情况:参与者的纵向反馈,以及在新冠疫情期间从面对面形式转变为虚拟形式。
我们考察了2015年至2021年参加研讨会的参与者的会后评估。我们对关于如何改进研讨会的评估自由文本回复和“其他评论”进行了定性分析。对潜在的改进领域进行了分类,并纵向汇总了出现的频率。分别使用t检验和卡方检验研究了参与者对研讨会的评分以及面对面和虚拟形式之间人口统计学特征的差异。
8年间共有286名参与者参加了该研讨会。参与者对研讨会的评分一直很高,各年份之间没有实质性差异。“其他评论”项出现了三个主要主题:(1)社区感;(2)热情与赋能;(3)预留时间的价值。随着时间推移,参与者指出的改进领域似乎越来越少。面对面和虚拟形式在参与者评分或人口统计学特征方面没有显著差异。
虽然研讨会随着时间推移发生了变化,但参与者的评估变化不大。核心内容和结构可能对参与者的体验影响最大。