Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37747294›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of radiology2023

Interventional radiology training in the UK: a view from within-a national survey.

Usman Mahay, Paul Jenkins, Linda Watkins, Indrajeet Mandal, Omotolani Lewis, Katrina Elizabeth Harborne, Shian Patel, John Reicher, Wing Yan Liu, Jim Zhong and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Usman MahayDepartment of Interventional Radiology, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8403-8828
Paul JenkinsPeninsula Radiology Academy, Plymouth, United Kingdom.
Linda WatkinsDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Indrajeet MandalDepartment of Radiology, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Omotolani LewisDepartment of Radiology, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Katrina Elizabeth HarborneDepartment of Interventional Radiology, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Shian PatelDepartment of Interventional Radiology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada.
John ReicherDepartment of Interventional Radiology, The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, United Kingdom.
Wing Yan LiuDepartment of Interventional Radiology, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, United Kingdom.
Jim ZhongDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Mohamad HamadyDepartment of Interventional Radiology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7512-1056

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveInterventional radiology (IR) training in the UK has evolved since recognition as a subspecialty in 2010 and introduction of a new curriculum in 2021. The changing landscape, increasing workload and COVID-19 have affected training. The purpose of this study was to review trainees' perspectives on training and develop strategies to further improve training.

methodsOnline survey approved by the British Society of Interventional Radiology Council distributed to British Society of Interventional Radiology Trainee members between 9 March 22 and 25 March 2022. The survey was open to all UK based ST4-6 IR trainees and fellows. Descriptive and thematic analysis was undertaken.

results43 responses were received from 17/19 UK training regions. Females represented 10% (4/41) and 5% (2/43) less than full time (LTFT) trainees. 82% (31/38) felt their curriculum was suitable for their training and 28/38 (74%) were satisfied with IR training. Vascular IR, Interventional Oncology, paediatrics and stroke thrombectomy were identified as areas of training desiring improvement. 45% (18/40) stated exposure to IR led clinics and 17.5% (7/40) to IR led ward rounds. Only 6/38 (15.7%) received structured IR teaching at least once a month. Approximately, a third of respondents (13/38) stated training opportunities were significantly compromised secondary to COVID-19.

conclusionThis survey shows overall good satisfaction with IR training. However, improved training opportunities in vascular IR, interventional oncology, paediatric IR and stroke thrombectomy are required. In addition, access to clinics, ward rounds and protected time for research is needed to improve training quality. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: New national UK IR training survey.

Indexed as

COVID-19StrokeChildCurriculumFemaleHumansRadiology, InterventionalSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID37747294
PMCPMC10607392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.