Tutorial linked to higher oncology confidence among foundation doctors

The evaluation included 138 first- and second-year foundation doctors at Manchester Foundation Trust and Salford Royal Foundation Trust. Before the intervention, more than half of participants described their confidence in undertaking an oncological history as “not very confident” or “not confident”; afterward, fewer than 5% selected either of those responses. Researchers assessed the intervention with anonymous quantitative questionnaires completed before and after a tutorial co-delivered by two foundation doctors and acute oncology service nurses.

The questionnaires were internally developed and focused on two areas: doctors’ confidence in taking an oncology history and their knowledge of how to refer to the acute oncology service. Because the study used a prospective cohort design with measurements taken before and after the intervention, rather than random assignment to intervention and comparison groups, it cannot isolate the tutorial as the sole cause of the observed changes. The change in reported confidence was substantial.

The combined proportion of foundation doctors who said they were “not very confident” or “not confident” in taking an oncological history fell from more than 50% before education to less than 5% after it. The researchers assessed this difference with a chi-squared test, obtaining a P-value below 0.001. This finding concerns trainees’ reported confidence; it does not by itself demonstrate that their history-taking performance or patient care improved.

Knowledge of how to refer to the acute oncology service also increased significantly after the educational intervention. The study reported an odds ratio of 89, with a 95% confidence interval of 21–372 and a P-value below 0.001. The point estimate was therefore large, but the confidence interval was wide and included a broad range of plausible values for the association.

The authors said the findings support including acute oncology teaching in foundation doctor education. Foundation doctors work in varied settings across general practice and hospitals and often interact with oncology patients, making familiarity with oncological assessments and the acute oncology service relevant to their roles. The evaluation nevertheless remains limited to 138 trainees at two trusts and measures self-reported confidence and questionnaire-based knowledge.

Subject of Research: Prospective evaluation of an acute oncology educational intervention for foundation doctors at two NHS trusts

Article Title: Acute oncology for foundation doctors: evaluating an educational intervention

Article References: Smith, D. R., Solomon, R., Morris, M., & Raby, S. (2026). Acute oncology for foundation doctors: evaluating an educational intervention. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-09835-y

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12909-026-09835-y

Keywords: acute oncology, foundation doctors, medical education, oncology history-taking, referral knowledge, confidence, prospective cohort study, questionnaire, NHS trusts, Acute, oncology, foundation