ArticlePhysical and engineering sciences in medicine2021
Report of the ACPSEM radiation oncology medical physics workforce modelling project task group.
Article in Physical and engineering sciences in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Current status of the working environment of brachytherapy in Japan: a nationwide survey-based analysis focusing on radiotherapy technologists and medical physicists.Journal of radiation research · 2024Article
- Navigating the 2021 ACPSEM ROMP workforce model: insights from a single institution.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2024Article
- ACPSEM position paper: pre-treatment patient specific plan checks and quality assurance in radiation oncology.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2024Article
- ACPSEM position paper on ROMP scope of practice and staffing levels for magnetic resonance linear accelerators.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ACPSEM radiation oncology medical physics workforce modelling project task group was formed to acquire a snapshot of practices in Australia and New Zealand and to develop an activity-based workforce model. To achieve this, two surveys were carried out, capturing the work practices of 98 radiation oncology departments and 182 college members. The member survey provided a snapshot of the current workforce: their demographics, work conditions, professional recognition, and future plans. The facility survey provided an Australian and New Zealand contextualisation of the volume-based activities defined in the International Atomic Energy Agency activity-based radiation oncology staffing model at a granular level. An ACPSEM ROMP workforce model was developed to be a modelling tool applicable at both the facility and sector levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34780043What 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.