From undergraduate dissertation to journal publication.  Multiple versions of one piece of work to meet different criteria. My dissertation was personal. It consisted of an article written to meet journal specification (and dissertation marking criteria) and was accompanied by a reflexive journal. A tick box exercise on one account and a heartfelt, soul-searching reflection on the other. It mapped out my journey as a student and exposed my hopes for my role as a qualified radiographer.

My dissertation was marked favourably and then as I left the secure environment of being a student, it seemed determined to follow. I vaguely recall discussions as a student about how much time you spend on your dissertation to never look at it again. I have not looked at it quite the same way again but have seen it in different guises when I co-presented our findings at the SOR Annual Radiotherapy Conference 2024 and responded to a flyer for an open call for publication submissions for student dissertations.

The title question is specific to patients with a hearing impairment or other language barriers undergoing radiotherapy for breast cancer; however, it was sparked from a passion for inclusion and patient-centred care and the topics of anxiety, patient engagement and methods of communication that were raised are applicable to all patients receiving radiotherapy treatment.

Although there is a part of me that is braced for some critique of the article as a piece of research, I do hope that readers might take courage to embark on their own research projects and publish or at least reflect on their own practice and start conversations to implement change however small.

I think I viewed sending out the questionnaire as the starting point of the research. I had not appreciated how much work was involved to acquire a good understanding of the wider topic. I found it difficult to formulate questions and suitable answers when I did not understand breast cancer radiotherapy and DIBH as well as the recipients most likely would.

With a response from 22 out of a potential 56 my emotions were conflicting; on one hand I was so grateful that someone had replied and on the other I was disappointed we had not received a majority. Having been informed that it was a student survey, I also couldn’t help but wonder if it was deemed lower priority and whether respondents would have answered as thoroughly and accurately as if it was from a professional source. In response to the question enquiring about challenges with DIBH delivery, two participants answered “none”. Given the variety of the responses from other departments and my own experience, I find it difficult to believe that a radiographer who delivers DIBH does not ever find any aspects of DIBH challenging. Fun fact -the average time of questionnaire completion was 9 minutes and 33 seconds. Could the questionnaire have been better? I am not sure I would have learnt as much about myself, research or publishing if it had been.  To the 22 questionnaire respondents, thank you for providing us with some primary data for a project which has since led to so many conversations on equality, diversity and inclusion in radiotherapy practice. Although I love discussion, I am still motivated to find a way to implement equitable access to DIBH for breast cancer radiotherapy.