Two years of teaching close to home: Lessons learned from a near-peer model for an introductory lecture series for hematology-oncology fellows.

person Anthony Iacoviello Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA info_outline Anthony Iacoviello, Barbara Lam, Rushad Patell, Jonathan L Berry, Deepa Rangachari

Authors person Anthony Iacoviello Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA info_outline Anthony Iacoviello, Barbara Lam, Rushad Patell, Jonathan L Berry, Deepa Rangachari Organizations Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA Abstract Disclosures Research Funding No funding sources reported Background: First-year hematology-oncology fellows face a large initial knowledge gap due to limited disease-specific content exposure during residency training. To facilitate their transition, we introduced a near-peer lecture series during academic year (AY) 2021-22, featuring near-peers (2 nd and 3 rd year [“senior”] fellows) as the primary instructors guided by content experts (disease specific faculty) [Berry, et al. JCO OP 2023]. This follow-up study’s primary aim was to assess the lectures’ continued impact on learning for 1 st year fellows, as well as the impact on the educational skills of senior fellows. We also sought to assess the continued support of this format by faculty. Methods: For AY 2023-24, each rising senior fellow attended a one-hour preparatory workshop on active learning techniques in Spring 2023. They were then assigned 2-3 topics to teach and paired with ≥1 expert faculty. Lectures were conducted from July to September 2023. We administered anonymous surveys immediately post-lecture to attendees and at end-of-series to senior fellows and faculty. Results are summarized as proportions with binomial 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: We received 109 immediate post-lecture responses for 26 lectures (66% of total lectures). Of 1 st year fellow respondents (82.5% of all responses), 80% (95% CI [72-88%]) found the lectures very engaging, 82% (95% CI [76-90%]) found them relevant, 54% (95% [CI 46-62%]) felt very confident in disease diagnosis and staging, and 43% (95% CI [37-49%]) felt very confident in disease treatment following the lectures. All responding senior fellows (N=7) endorsed the lecture format. The majority of senior fellows (67%, 95% CI [50-84%]) found the one-hour workshop only somewhat helpful, and 71% (95% CI [50-92%]) felt only somewhat well equipped to give their lecture. Over half (57%, 95% CI [41-73%]) of senior fellows reused previous slide decks and did not meet with faculty in person to prepare for their sessions. On qualitative review of senior fellow feedback, common themes included time constraints and lack of structured format during the preparation phase. Of faculty respondents (N=9), 78% (95% CI [50-99%]) supported continuation of the format, but only 44% (95% CI [38-50%]) met in-person with their assigned senior fellow in advance of the teaching session. Conclusions: Our near-peer lecture series has broad support for its continuation and is meeting the needs of 1 st year fellows. To better help senior fellows improve their education skills, future iterations will focus on optimizing the pre-session coaching and preparatory phase. This will include structured coaching with an expert educator for content planning and development, an augmented process for pre-session meetings between senior fellows and faculty, and greater focus on defining the optimal timeline for session preparation.