Despite the rapidly declining number of physician-investigators, there is no consistent structure within medical education so far for involving medical students in research. To conduct an integrated mixed-methods systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies about medical students' participation in research, and to evaluate the evidence in order to guide policy decision-making regarding this issue. We followed the PRISMA statement guidelines during the preparation of this review and meta-analysis. We searched various databases as well as the bibliographies of the included studies between March 2012 and September 2013. We identified all relevant quantitative and qualitative studies assessing the effect of medical student participation in research, without restrictions regarding study design or publication date. Prespecified outcome-specific quality criteria were used to judge the admission of each quantitative outcome into the meta-analysis. Initial screening of titles and abstracts resulted in the retrieval of 256 articles for full-text assessment. Eventually, 79 articles were included in our study, including eight qualitative studies. An integrated approach was used to combine quantitative and qualitative studies into a single synthesis. Once all included studies were identified, a data-driven thematic analysis was performed. Medical student participation in research is associated with improved short- and long- term scientific productivity, more informed career choices and improved knowledge about-, interest in- and attitudes towards research. Financial worries, gender, having a higher degree (MSc or PhD) before matriculation and perceived competitiveness of the residency of choice are among the factors that affect the engagement of medical students in research and/or their scientific productivity. Intercalated BSc degrees, mandatory graduation theses and curricular research components may help in standardizing research education during medical school.

Little is known regarding the safety and feasibility of breastfeeding in women with a history of breast cancer. We have performed a survey among breast cancer patients who completed their pregnancy following breast cancer management to examine their lactation behaviours and its effect on breast cancer outcome. Out of 32 women identified, 20 were reachable and accepted to take the questionnaire. Ten women initiated breastfeeding, 4 stopped within one month and 6 had long-term success with a median period of 11 months (7-17 months). The latter were all previously subjected to breast conserving surgery and received qualified lactation counselling at delivery. The main reasons for not initiating breastfeeding were "uncertainty regarding maternal safety" and "a priori unfeasibility" expressed either by the obstetrician or by the oncologist. At a median follow-up of 48 months following delivery, all 20 women were alive with two relapses; one in each group (i.e., lactating and non-lactating). This analysis adds to the limited available evidence on the feasibility and safety of breastfeeding in breast cancer survivors. Proper fertility and survivorship counselling is crucial and requires more attention in breast cancer clinics.

Patient engagement has gained increasing attention in cancer care as it is widely acknowledged as an essential element of high-quality care. There are limited data on how oncology nurses might apply techniques that encourage patient engagement. Therefore, this study aims to understand which nursing strategies can favour patient engagement in oncological care from patients’ and nurses’ perspectives. We conducted a qualitative study involving oncology patients and oncology nurses. Patients were interviewed, while nurses were involved in focus groups (FGs). Both interviews and FGs were analysed by the means of thematic analysis. We interviewed six patients and conducted two FGs, involving 17 nurses. Five themes were identified from patients’ interviews: effective information, having the opportunity to choose, being considered a person, trusted relationship with nurses, and receiving support and advice. Additionally, five themes were identified from the FGs: the nurse–patient relationship, personalisation of care, information style, engagement strategies, and the team. The participants highlighted the importance of comprehensive information in order for patients to feel more involved. Great importance was given to the nurse–patient relationship, which must be based on trust and mutual respect. Both nurses and patients emphasised the importance of person-centred care. A more systematic implementation of suggestions from the participants in this study is desirable for the future.

Telephone-based interventions can increase accessibility to healthcare and are increasingly used as a convenient method of providing support. We conducted a systematic review of published literature reporting adult patients’ perceptions of the acceptability of, and satisfaction with, telephone-based interventions during or post-treatment for cancer. Systematic searches identified 4,855 articles. Forty-eight articles describing 50 studies were included in the review. Three intervention categories were identified post hoc: (1) telephone follow-up in lieu of routine hospital follow-up, (2) telephone interventions for treatment side-effect monitoring and toxicity management supplementary to usual care, and (3) supplementary psycho-educational telephone interventions. Across studies, some consistent findings emerged. Positive perceptions emphasised the convenience of telephone interventions and increased accessibility to care. Conflicting perceptions of the quality of the support received, the impact of telecare on the patient–healthcare professional relationship and the need for such interventions emerged. In conclusion, the evidence base relating to patients’ perceptions of telephone-based interventions is increasing. Interpretation of findings is currently limited by methodological limitations in the primary research. The instruments chosen to assess patient satisfaction quantitatively do not always reflect the patient-centred priorities that emerge from qualitative data. Subsequent research would benefit from well-designed qualitative studies and patient-centred outcome measures to ensure that the individuality of participants’ positive and negative experiences is captured.