ArticleTechnical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology2024
From novice to Expert: Reducing Breast Imaging rejection rates through physician mentorship in Advanced Practice Radiation therapy.
Article in Technical innovations & patient support 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.
- Gathering evidence on preparation for advanced practice in radiation therapy: An international focus group synthesis.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The study's goal was to evaluate the impact of a Radiation Oncologist (RO)-Radiation Therapist (RTT) mentorship on image approval rates for a breast population undergoing radiation therapy in a high-volume practice. The mentorship was undertaken within a large health system in partial fulfillment of the Expert Practice Module for a Masters (MSc) in Advanced Practice Radiotherapy and Oncology. Methods: Images were retrieved from the MOSAIQ EMR on breast diagnostic code. 1,295 images/115 patients were reviewed pre-mentorship (October 2019-March 2020) and compared with 1,047 images/91patients during/post-mentorship (April 2020-September 2020). The Anderson-Gill (AG) model was used to estimate the hazard ratio for image rejection. Rejected images were classified by reason and compared using Fisher's exact test. Concordance data (RO/RTT image rejection) were collected during Phase Three of the mentorship. Results: Of 115 patients assessed pre-mentorship, 16 (14 %) had at least 1 image rejected at any session. Of 91 patients assessed post-mentorship, 8 (9 %) had at least 1 image rejected. Likelihood of image rejection decreased by 54 %, with a hazard ratio of 0.46 [95 % CI: 0.24, 0.88]; p = 0.0195. Reasons for image rejection differed pre- and post-mentorship. Poor imaging technique accounted for rejection of 9 of 24 images (37.5 %) before compared to 0 of 11 images (0 %) post-mentorship. Other reasons for image rejection: depth at isocenter (25 % pre-mentorship; 18 % post-mentorship), supraclavicular medial border position (12.5 % vs. 9.09 %), isocenter location (12.5 % vs. 0 %), arm position (4.17 % vs. 54.55 %); hip alignment (8.33 % vs. 18.18 %). Concordance rate was 100 %. Conclusions: The mentorship proved successful in elevating the RTT's skills and image approval rates, while contributing to improvements in departmental imaging best practices.
Indexed as
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.