ArticleJournal of the advanced practitioner in oncology2026
Assessment of Advanced Practitioner Oncogenomic Training and Proficiency Before and After the Intervention of an Oncogenomic Module.
Article in Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Oncology advanced practitioners (APs) are integral to the daily care of patients with cancer. There is a gap in the literature addressing APs' training in genetics, specifically in baseline oncogenomics. The objective of this study was to evaluate the reported oncogenomic training and proficiency of APs working in hematology/oncology. Methods: An interventional pre- and post-test study was conducted with the target population of hematology/oncology APs, which was facilitated through a partnership with the Advanced Practitioner Society for Hematology and Oncology (APSHO). A survey was created to assess demographic variables, oncogenomic training, and concepts of knowledge proficiency among the participants. The intervention was an oncogenomic course. Results: 75 participants enrolled in the study, with 37 completing both the pre-test and post-test surveys. 78% of the participants reported limited genetics/genomics training in their master's or doctoral professional programs. 35% of the participants were undecided about access to oncogenomic on-the-job training. Many participants expressed uncertain or limited proficiency with ordering and interpreting tumor genomic profiling for somatic and potential pathogenic germline variants. A statistically significant improvement in the median scores was observed after taking the course in all six of the oncogenomic proficiency statements in the 37 participants who completed the study ( Discussion: This study evaluated the importance of perceived genetics/genomics training in formal and informal educational settings, as well as oncogenomic knowledge in APs working in hematology/oncology. The statistically significant increase in all the oncogenomic proficiency concepts analyzed in the post-test indicates that a focused oncogenomic course for APs is an effective learning strategy.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.