ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology
Networking and Applying to Radiation Oncology During A Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Survey of Medical Student Concerns.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe assessed the effectiveness of a virtual networking session tailored for third- and fourth-year medical students interested in radiation oncology, and report students' concerns about applying to radiation oncology during the pandemic. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multi-institutional networking session was hosted on Zoom and included medical students, faculty, and residents from across the country. The breakout room feature was used to divide participants into smaller groups. Participants were randomly shuffled into new groups every 10 to 15 minutes. Students completed pre- and post-session surveys.
resultsAmong the 134 students who registered, 69 students participated in the session, and 53 students completed a post-session survey. Most students reported the session was valuable or very valuable (79%), and it was easy or very easy to network through the virtual format (66%). After the session, 18 (33.9%) students reported their interest in radiation oncology increased, and 34 (64.2%) reported their interest remained the same. Most students believed COVID-19 (55%) and virtual interviews and platforms (55%) negatively or somewhat negatively affected their ability to select a residency program. Most students (62%) were concerned they will be inaccurately evaluated as an interviewee on a virtual platform. Although 30% agreed or strongly agreed the cost-savings and convenience of virtual interviews outweigh potential downsides, 66% of students were planning to visit cities of interest in person before rank list submission.
conclusionsMedical students reported significant concerns with their ability to be accurately evaluated and to choose among residency programs on a virtual platform. Students found the networking session to be a valuable resource for most students, and programs could continue similar efforts during the residency application cycle to better represent their program while maintaining certain financial and geographic advantages of a virtual environment.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.