Journal of Cancer Education

, 22:259 | Cite as

Cancer knowledge and perception of skills of general practice registrars in Australia

  • Michael B. Barton
  • Gabriel S. Gabriel
  • David Sutherland
  • Kendra J. Sundquist
  • Afaf Girgis


Background. The objective was to assess cancer knowledge and perception of skills of general pracice (GP) registrars in Australia. This will help design future educational resources.Methods. We surveyed GP registrars in different Australian states.Results. Of the registrars, 86% rated highly their ability in performing cervical smears. Registrars reported examining more patients with breast cancer, lung cancer, or melanoma than rectal cancer, cancer of mouth/tongue, or lymphoma. More registrars rated the quality of their training as reasonable or better in assisting patients to stop smoking or modify alcohol intake than in cancer-related tasks. One third rated their teaching on management of curable/incurable cancer and care of the dying as poor and/or very poor, and over half had never examined prostate or rectal cancers.Conclusions. GP registrars generally have good knowledge of cancer. Their exposure to cases of cancer is low, and it is of concern that many have never examined common tumors in our community.


Melanoma Rectal Cancer Prostate Specific Antigen Health Check Cancer Knowledge 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Trumble S. Changes to training for general practice in Australia. Asia Pac Fam Med. 2003;2:171–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Australian Bureau of Statistics. Media release. Cat No. 3302.0. Variations in mortality evident for different population groups in Australia. Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra, December 2, 2003.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barton MB, Tattersall MHN, Butow PN, et al. Cancer knowledge and skills on interns in Australia and New Zealand in 2001: comparison with 1990, and between course types. Med J Aust. 2003;178:285–289.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barton MB, Simons RG. A survey of cancer curricula in Australian and New Zealand medical schools in 1997. Oncology Education Committee of the Australian Cancer Society. Med J Aust. 1999;170:225–227.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kalucy E, Hann K & Whaites L. Divisions: a matter of balance. Results of the 2002–2003. Annual Survey of Divisions of General Practice. Adelaide: Primary Health Care Research & Information Service, Department of General Practice, Flinders University, and the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. 2004.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) & Australasian Association of Cancer Registries (AACR). Cancer in Australia 2000. Canberra, Australia: AIHW. 2003. AIHW cat. No. CAN 18 (Cancer Series no. 23).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brameld KJ, Holman CD, Threlfall TJ, Lawrence DM, De Kierk NH. Increasing “active prevalence” of cancer in Western Australia and its implications for health services. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2002;26:164–169.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Smith WT, Tattersall MHN, Irwig LM, Langlands AO. Undergraduate education about cancer. Eur J Cancer. 1991;27:1448–1453.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tattersall MH, Langlands AO, Simpson JS, Forbes JF. Undergraduate education about cancer: a survey in Australian medical schools. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol. 1988;24:467–471.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oncology Education Committee. Ideal Oncology Curriculum for Medical Schools. Sydney, Australia: Australian Cancer Society; 1999.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) for Windows [computer program]. Release 11.5.0. Cary, NC: SPSS Inc; September 6, 2002.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association for Cancer Education 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael B. Barton
    • 1
  • Gabriel S. Gabriel
    • 1
  • David Sutherland
    • 2
  • Kendra J. Sundquist
    • 3
  • Afaf Girgis
    • 4
  1. 1.Liverpool Health ServiceCollaboration for Cancer Outcomes Research and EvaluationSydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Rural Health Unit, Faculty of MedicineUniversity of New South WalesSydney
  3. 3.Cancer Council of New South WalesSydney
  4. 4.Center for Health Research & Psycho-oncologyWallsend

Personalised recommendations