top of page
Search

Why oncology algorithms fail trainees (and how to fix them)

  • May 3
  • 3 min read


Most oncology algorithms are written by experts, for experts. But trainees need something different: clear structure, definitions and guidance on how to think through decisions. Living Algorithms are designed to make pathways easier to understand, navigate and apply in real clinical scenarios.

The gap between expertise and learning

Oncology algorithms are often created by leading specialists. They reflect:

  • Deep knowledge

  • Years of experience

  • Familiarity with complex decision making

But many of the people using algorithms are:

  • Fellows

  • Residents

  • Early-career clinicians

  • Generalists covering multiple diseases

There's a gap between how experts think and how trainees learn.

What trainees actually experience

When trainees open a traditional algorithm, they often encounter:

  • Abbreviations they don't fully recognize

  • Pathways that assume prior knowledge

  • Decision points without explanation

  • Dense or hard-to-follow structure

The information may be correct, but it's not always accessible.

A common scenario

A trainee is preparing for clinic. They open an algorithm to review a case.

Instead of clarity, they find themselves asking:

  • What does this abbreviation mean?

  • Why is this the recommended step?

  • How do I choose between these options?

  • Am I even looking at the right pathway?

This slows them down and limits learning. Even worse, it makes some trainees feel stupid when nothing could be further from the truth.

Why traditional algorithms fall short for trainees

Assumed knowledge

Experts naturally skip steps in their thinking, and algorithms often reflect that.


But trainees need those steps made explicit.

Lack of context

Decision points are presented without explanation. Trainees are left to infer:

  • Why a treatment is chosen

  • What factors matter

  • How alternatives compare

Unclear structure

Some algorithms are difficult to navigate.

  • Too many branches

  • Poor labeling

  • Hidden details

This makes it harder to build a mental model.

Overuse of abbreviations

Short forms may be efficient for experts. But for trainees, they can create confusion.

Even common terms can vary by disease.



What trainees actually need

Trainees are not just looking for answers. They are trying to learn how to think.

They need:

  • Clear definitions

  • Logical structure

  • Brief explanations at key steps

  • Visibility into clinical reasoning

In other words: not just the pathway, but the thinking behind it.

How Living Algorithms are designed differently

Living Algorithms are built with both experts and learners in mind.

What this looks like in practice

Clear, patient-centered structure

Algorithms start with:

  • Disease type

  • Stage

  • Biomarkers

  • Prior treatments

This helps trainees orient quickly.

Expandable details

Key steps include:

  • Rationale

  • Supporting data

  • Clinical context

Trainees can go deeper when needed, without overwhelming the main pathway.

Reduced ambiguity

Nodes are designed to be:

  • Concise

  • Specific

  • Actionable

With clear thresholds and criteria.

More intuitive navigation

Interactive elements allow users to:

  • Move step by step

  • Focus on relevant branches

  • Avoid unnecessary complexity

Opportunity for clarification

Where needed, algorithms can include:

  • Rationale

  • Definitions

  • Explanations

  • Supporting visuals

This helps trainees build their understanding and level of knowledge over time.

Making algorithms more educational

A strong algorithm should do two things:

  1. Help you make a decision

  2. Help you understand why

For trainees, the second step is just as important as the first.

Learning through real decisions

Trainees learn best in context. Not by memorizing lists, but by:

  • Seeing how decisions are made

  • Understanding tradeoffs

  • Connecting data to action

Algorithms that reflect real clinical reasoning accelerate this process.

Supporting confidence in clinic

One of the biggest challenges for trainees is confidence.

  • Am I choosing the right option?

  • Did I miss something?

  • Do I understand the reasoning?

Clear, structured algorithms help answer these questions quickly.

Better tools, better training

As oncology becomes more complex, training needs to evolve. There is too much:

  • Information

  • Data

  • Variation

...to rely on memorization alone.

Trainees need tools that help you:

  • Guide decisions

  • Support learning

  • Reduce cognitive load

Bottom line

Most oncology algorithms are built for those who already understand the system.

Trainees need something different: clarity, context and structure.

Living Algorithms are designed to bridge that gap, helping clinicians not only decide what to do, but understand why.

Try it as a trainee

The next time you review a case, ask: do I understand how this decision was made?

If not, the algorithm is incomplete.

If yes, you're learning in the way that matters most. And your patients will thank you.


 
 

Open Medicine is where leading doctors post Living Algorithms to share their expertise. Instead of static diagrams in PDFs, Living Algorithms are mobile-first, interactive and updated instantly as new clinical evidence emerges.
 

We make expert medical knowledge easy to access so clinicians can offer the best treatment for their patients.

135 Commonwealth Drive

Menlo Park, California 94025 USA

     

    © 2025 Open Medicine

     

    bottom of page