Exploring motivations for participating in research among Australian women with advanced gynaecological cancer: a qualitative study.

PURPOSE: With global moves to increase research among those living with advanced cancer and legitimise consumers as part of cancer research, this article aims to build an understanding of women's motivations and reasons for participating in gynaecological cancer research. As a secondary aim, we considered the role of qualitative methods in enabling active involvement of consumers in research. METHODS: We applied thematic discursive analysis to 18 in-depth interviews with women diagnosed with advanced (stage III-IV) gynaecological cancer living in Australia. RESULTS: We found that women viewed research as a vehicle for change in two directions: improving the lives of future generations and improving education and awareness. Underpinning these two framings of research, women spoke about their own role and reasons for participating in this interview study. Women's stories were painted against a backdrop of social and medical silences around gynaecological cancer. It was from such silence that women chose to speak up and position themselves as participating in service for knowledge production. CONCLUSION: We learned that trust, reciprocity and relationships are central to women's decisions to participate in cancer research. Legitimising consumers in cancer research requires methods, methodologies and practices that pay careful attention to power, control and representation.

Exploring postgraduate epidemiology competencies: Preparing our students for a post-COVID world.

OBJECTIVE: This research sought consensus from both experts and graduates on postgraduate epidemiology competencies. METHODS: In 2021, a two-round online survey using a modified Delphi method was undertaken exploring competencies across six domains. Focus groups were conducted with recent postgraduate epidemiology graduates to assess their viewpoints on learning experiences and employability. RESULTS: Forty-one experts participated in the first Delphi round. Nineteen factors reached consensus (>70% agreement) for importance and feasibility after two survey rounds in the following domains: general epidemiologic methods/concepts (n=8/13), advanced analytic/statistical skills (n=2/7), applied epidemiology/specialised fields (n=1/4), professional/transferrable skills (n=5/14), general public health knowledge/skills (n=2/4), independent research and work-integrated learning (n=1/3). Nine graduates participated in focus groups. A main theme was the substantial value gained in undertaking a dissertation, acknowledging its benefit for applying research skills and for networking opportunities. CONCLUSIONS: To ensure that high-quality epidemiological research and practice continues, we need consensus on the set of essential skills required of graduating students. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Competencies for postgraduate epidemiology students require periodic review to safeguard a workforce that can meet emerging challenges and work across academia, research, policy, and practice.