Further pages

• About the EACR
  • An introduction to EACR
  • Presidents of the EACR
  • Benefits of Membership
  • Communication with Members
  • Mission / Strategic Plan
• Governance
  • 'At a Glance'
  • Constitution
  • Committees
• Society Members
  • Affiliated Society Members
  • Opportunities to become an affiliated National Society
• Sustaining Membership and Principal Sponsors
  • Our partners
• Eurocancercoms
  • The project
  • Papers
  • Survey results
• ECCO
  • EACR is a Founding Member of ECCO
• Make a Donation
  • How do I donate?
  • My donation
• Useful Links
  • Affiliated EACR Society Members
  • Useful Links

EACR’s Eurocancercoms survey results

Click here to open a short graphical presentation (10 slides) of the survey results

Click here to open a PDF of the survey comment banks

EACR’s survey of cancer communication was sent to 6073 European members. 626 comprehensive responses were received from members across 32 countries, a total response rate of 10.3%.

The high level of response and a large number of text comments showed that efficient communication is an issue in which many European cancer professionals are interested, and on which they hold strong opinions.

Across the different demographics such as geographic location, age and career level there was an extraordinary level of convergence in the answers given. Although there may be individual issues of concern for those in different countries and institutes, most scientists across Europe face similar problems with communication. This was echoed in the text responses given, with many respondents independently listing the same problems and suggestions.

Lack of a central location

The most frequently mentioned problems when using the Web were a) the lack of time and b) the lack of a central location from which information could be retrieved. There appears to be an issue of too much information and too little time, resulting in an increased use of search engines, which are not specifically catered to the scientific community. Many respondents called for an integrated website or search engine which they could use to access the information they need.

The public and the media

Respondents rated the public as the hardest group of all with whom to communicate. The survey shows that those whose research is released via press release consider reports in the media to be significantly less truthful and accurate than the original press releases. Many commented that the non-scientific media are liable to mislead the public, for example by reporting discoveries in basic science as major breakthroughs, which engenders a general lack of understanding about basic science. One respondent suggested that since the internet is “filled with information of poor quality and reliability”, informative and reliable websites should be set up to communicate with the public about scientific discoveries.

Communication and collaboration

Many respondents indicated that they find it hard to make contacts with other researchers, for example for scientific collaboration. Many respondents said they can only make contacts at meetings (at which attendance is limited, especially for those with limited budgets), which indicates that more needs to be done to increase openness and collaboration within the scientific community. Communication between different groups of scientists, i.e. basic, translational and clinical, was rated as poor, and several commented on this as an area where improvement is needed. Many respondents suggested that a social-professional, “Facebook-like” network for cancer scientists would assist with this.

Open access

Although none of the questions in the survey mentioned open access, many respondents commented on the cost of journals and articles and the need for more journal articles to be open access. This appears to be an especially serious issue for those whose institutes have limited budgets and cannot afford to subscribe to many journals.

Consensus meetings following publication of the survey

Three consensus meetings were held in Oslo at the biennial meeting of the European Association for Cancer Research EACR-21. The conference was attended by 1,300 participants and the occasion was taken to share and discuss the findings with the EACR Council, participants at an open early morning session and with the EACR Executive Committee. Each meeting arrived independently at the conclusion that the findings of the survey were secure and that the key issues for further discussion were highlighted.

Consensus Meeting Discussion Spotlight: Open Access

In an interesting discussion with conference participants, experiences in easily accessing new data and information were in sharp contrast. While one researcher might find that access to published research was very straightforward as the institute had all the most relevant subscriptions, another regularly hit the ‘payment required’ barrier. Copyright restrictions made it difficult to acquire the information required from a fellow scientist and having to wait any time at all was extremely frustrating.

Open Access publishing within six or twelve months was described as ‘too late’ for cancer research. There was also doubt expressed that anything could be changed very quickly as the desire on the part of researchers to publish in highly regarded, high impact journals, is strong - for career reasons. Funders of research were seen to be key players in winning access for all to publicly funded research.