Table 2.

Qualitative analysis of transcripts from 2 oncology fellow focus groups (1 at the University of California, San Francisco, and 1 at Stanford University) that evaluated a pilot of solid oncology scaffolds (July 2019 to December 2021).

Theme		Supportive quotation
Advantages
	Accessible, succinct resource	“[The scaffolds were] online and quickly accessible, for example on the shuttle on the way to work.”
	Addressed the dearth of similar resources	“There are few resources currently available for oncology fellows. [The scaffolds] filled a niche not currently filled by other resources.”
	Effective preparation materials for clinical work and examinations	“[The scaffolds] were a security blanket…helpful for clinic prep and inpatient consults.”
	Structured information for rapid reviews	“[The scaffolds] were helpful in that they provided frameworks…and approaches.”
	Easier subsequent use of more complex resources	“The guidelines felt less ‘foreign’ after reviewing the scaffolds…[the scaffolds] helped with knowledge retention from more complex resources.”
Challenges
	Lack of fellow confidence in updating the scaffolds	“I wasn’t sure whether my learning points were important enough to add to the scaffold.”
	Lack of fellow ownership over the scaffolds	“I think fellows are probably less likely to update the scaffolds if they don’t feel responsible for them.”
	Too simple and broad to help with nuanced patient care	“Clinical care is so nuanced…the scaffolds may be too broad to help with some clinical situations.”
Suggestions
	Improve visual appeal	“Maybe make them more visually appealing by including more figures or tables.”
	Clarify purpose and the fact that scaffolds can be updated	“I would make it clear that the slides are editable and that fellows should update them.”
	Facilitate opportunities for fellows to update scaffolds	“Asking fellows to update these might be good for their learning.”