ESTRO 2025 - Abstract Book

S4274

RTT - Education, training, advanced practice and role developments

ESTRO 2025

4397

Proffered Paper The impact of RTT research roles in prospective studies

Lynsey Devlin 1,2 , Aoife Williamson 1,2 , Lisa Hay 1,2 , Donna Caldwell 1 , Chloe Wilkinson 1 , Aileen Duffton 1,2 1 Radiotherapy department, Beatson West of Scotland Centre, Glasgow, United Kingdom. 2 Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom Purpose/Objective: Demonstrating the impact of radiation therapist (RTT) and RTT advanced practitioners (RTT-AP) involved in research is challenging. Clinical responsibility metrics are straightforward to quantify e.g. caseload, number of patient interactions. Quantifying and communicating research contributions can increase stakeholder engagement; enhance visibility in research/leadership roles; and strengthen positions within clinical teams. To ensure the sustainability of research roles and ongoing support from healthcare organisations, data and impact metrics are essential. We aimed to quantify RTT-AP research tasks and evaluate the impact of roles and responsibilities on research outputs. Edge V3.7.3 database was searched between 2014-2024 to identify a list of radiotherapy (RT) studies, then examined for RTTs named as Chief-Investigator(CI), Principal-Investigator(PI), Co-Investigator(Co-I), or, included on the delegation log of prospective studies in one RT centre. This provided the target population of RTTs, in addition to RTT-AP specialists. Survey Google forms was used to develop the survey, which included demographic, open-ended, multiple-choice and free text questions about research experience over 10 years. Questions were written using research governance terminology 1 . The survey was piloted by 2 RTTs ensuring clarity and ambiguity. Amendments were made following this process. All identified RTTs were sent the questionnaire via email, allowing 3 weeks for completion. A literature search (MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, ORCID) of the RTT group confirmed first, last and co-author publications and international/national oral presentations. Descriptive statistics quantified involvement. An adapted version of the payback framework categorised elements of relevant research outputs 2 . Results: Nineteen of 21 RTTs involved in research completed the survey, highlighting involvement in 81/126 (63.5%) of RT studies identified. Mean time from first formal responsibility on a clinical study was 6.5 (SD 5.6) years. 16/19 (84%) RTTs had a role or delegated responsibility, including 5 ,7 and 21 CI, PI and Co-I roles respectively. RTTs held 60 positions with delegated tasks. Figure 1 quantifies the frequency of responsibilities carried out by RTTs. Table 1 shows the demographics of the RTTs research experience. The total peer reviewed publications as first-author, last author and co-author were 20, 6, and 47 respectively; and number of international/national oral presentations were >40 and >50 respectively. Research funding secured with RTTs as lead applicant was £155,231, and £6.2million as co-applicant. RTTs research outputs met all 5 Payback Framework categories. Material/Methods: Target population