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.

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.

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.

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.

Postpartum depression (PPD) affects up to one in five mothers and birthing parents, yet as few as 10% access evidence-based treatment. One-day cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT)-based workshops for PPD have the potential to reach large numbers of sufferers and be integrated into stepped models of care.

This randomized controlled trial of 461 mothers and birthing parents in Ontario, Canada with Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) scores ⩾10, age ⩾18 years, and an infant <12 months of age compared the effects of a 1-day CBT-based workshop plus treatment as usual (TAU; i.e. care from any provider(s) they wished) to TAU alone at 12-weeks post-intervention on PPD, anxiety, the mother–infant relationship, offspring behavior, health-related quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Data were collected via REDCap.

Workshops led to meaningful reductions in EPDS scores (m = 15.77 to 11.22; b = −4.6, p < 0.01) and were associated with three times higher odds of a clinically significant decrease in PPD [odds ratio (OR) 3.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.93–4.67]. Anxiety also decreased and participants had three times the odds of clinically significant improvement (OR 3.20, 95% CI 2.03–5.04). Participants reported improvements in mother–infant bonding, infant-focused rejection and anger, and effortful control in their toddlers. The workshop plus TAU achieved similar quality-adjusted life-years at lower costs than TAU alone.

One-day CBT-based workshops for PPD can lead to improvements in depression, anxiety, and the mother–infant relationship and are cost-saving. This intervention could represent a perinatal-specific option that can treat larger numbers of individuals and be integrated into stepped care approaches at reasonable cost.

The need for palliative care (PC) will continue to increase in Canada with population aging. Many older adults prefer to “age in place” and receive care in their own homes. Currently, there is a lack of standardized quality indicators (QIs) for PC delivered in the community in Canada.

A one-day workshop collected expert opinions on what should be measured to capture quality PC. Three brainstorming sessions were focused on addressing the following questions: (1) what is important to measure to support quality PC, regardless of setting? (2) Of the identified measures, are any of special importance to care provided in the home? (3) What are the challenges, barriers, and opportunities for creating these measures? The National Consensus Project (NCP) for Quality Palliative Care framework was used as a guide to group together important comments into key themes.

The experts identified four themes that are important for measuring quality, regardless of care setting, including access to care in the community by a multidisciplinary team, care for the individual with PC needs, support for the informal caregiver (e.g., family, friends), and symptom management for individuals with PC needs. Two additional themes were of special importance to measuring quality PC in the home, including spiritual care for individuals with PC needs and home as the preferred place of death. The challenges, barriers, and potential opportunities to these quality issues were also discussed.

PC experts, through this collaborative process, made a substantial contribution to the creation of a standardized set of QIs for community-based PC. Having a standardized set of QIs will enable health care professionals and decision makers to target areas for improvement, implement interventions to improve the quality of care, and ultimately, optimize the health and well-being of individuals with a serious illness.

In Singapore, the core curriculum for end-of-life (EOL) care used in nurse training courses is limited. Only 45% of nurses indicated familiarity with inpatient palliative care. Nurses who lack skills in palliative care may develop anxiety and negative attitudes towards caring for dying patients. We explored whether a two-day, multimodal EOL care workshop could reduce nurses’ death anxiety and improve nurses’ skills, knowledge, and attitude towards palliative care.

Forty-five nurses participated in the workshop. At baseline before and at six weeks after, a 20-item knowledge-based questionnaire and the Death Attitude Profile-Revised (DAP-R) were administered. Six weeks post-workshop, in-depth interviews were conducted. We employed descriptive statistics, student paired samples t-test and inductive thematic analysis.

There was a significant improvement in nurses’ knowledge score (p < 0.01) and reduction in their death anxiety score (p < 0.01). Fear of Death (p = 0.025) and Death Avoidance (p = 0.047) sub-scores decreased significantly. However, the remaining domains such as Neutral Acceptance, Approach Acceptance, and Escape Acceptance did not show any significant difference, although Escape Acceptance showed a trend towards a reduced score (p = 0.063). After the workshop, more nurses adopted the Neutral Acceptance stance (76.2%), and none of them fell into the Fear of Death subdomain. Most nurses interviewed reported a positive change in their knowledge, attitudes, and practice even after the workshop.

The multimodal palliative care workshop was useful in improving nurses’ EOL knowledge and reducing their anxiety towards death. The positive change in nurses’ attitudes and practices were noted to be sustained for at least six weeks after the intervention.

High impact biomedical research is increasingly conducted by large, transdisciplinary, multisite teams in an increasingly collaborative environment. Thriving in this environment requires robust teamwork skills, which are not acquired automatically in the course of traditional scientific education. Team science skills training does exist, but most is directed at clinical care teams, not research teams, and little is focused on the specific training needs of early-career investigators, whose early team leadership experiences may shape their career trajectories positively or negatively. Our research indicated a need for team science training designed specifically for early-career investigators.

To address this need, we designed and delivered a 2-day workshop focused on teaching team science skills to early-career investigators. We operationalized team science competencies, sought the advice of team science experts, and performed a needs assessment composed of a survey and a qualitative study. Through these multiple approaches, we identified and grouped training priorities into three broad training areas and developed four robust, hands-on workshop sessions.

Attendees comprised 30 pre- and post-doc fellows (TL1) and early-career faculty (KL2 and K12). We assessed impact with a pre- and post-workshop survey adapted from the Team Skills Scale. Results from the pre- and post-test Wilcoxon signed-rank analysis (n = 25) showed statistically significant improvement in team science skills and confidence. Open-ended responses indicated that the workshop focus was appropriate and well targeted to the trainees’ needs.

Although team science education is still very much in its infancy, these results suggest that training targeted to early-career investigators improves team skills and may foster improved collaboration.