ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology2024
Advancing Resident Education: Experiential Success in the Creation of a Comprehensive Clinical Didactic Series in Radiation Oncology.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Radiation Oncology Resident Education: Is Change Needed?Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: An effective didactic curriculum is a cornerstone for a successful residency program, as it is the basis upon which residents acquire the necessary knowledge and perspective to provide high-quality, evidence-based care. Here we describe our success in creating a standardized curriculum in clinical radiation oncology - one that was well-received and led to significantly improved performance on the national in-service examination. Methods and Materials: One-hundred and fifty topics were outlined in accordance with the American Board of Radiology; to accommodate this breadth of material, didactic frequency was increased from biweekly to daily. As a clinical correlate to these sessions, a teaching library of over 100 real-world cases was compiled for individual learning. Finally, comprehensive dosimetric constraints were compiled to aid residents in radiation therapy plan evaluation. To evaluate these curricular changes, anonymous questionnaires were provided to all residents and faculty, and de-identified resident clinical performance from the annual in-service examination was analyzed. Results: Before the introduction of the standardized curriculum, the mean clinical percentage on the in-service examination was 46%, equivalent to the 17th percentile. Within 2 years of implementation of the new curriculum, both the mean percentage and percentile were significantly improved, with the mean percentage correct at 69.3% and the mean percentile at the 59th percentile ( Conclusions: This is the first report of the creation of a standardized curriculum and outcomes in radiation oncology. Although there are certainly developmental challenges, addressing these barriers creates an education model that effectively imparts knowledge, fosters multidisciplinary thinking, and prepares residents for the diverse challenges of clinical practice. We present our institutional experience with the intent of publishing this curriculum on a national platform in the coming years.
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.