Objectives: 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.
Methods: 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 t-tests and Chi-square tests, respectively.
Results: 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.
Signifinace of results: 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.
Keywords: Early career; Methodology; Outcomes; Research; Supportive oncology; Workshop.