ArticleCureus2024
Radiation Oncology Residency Training in Saudi Arabia: Direction in Attaining Competencies.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Radiotherapy is a cornerstone in cancer treatment as a part of multidisciplinary team management. The field has evolved significantly over the past two decades due to technological advancement. To meet the increased need for manpower in the field, the radiation oncology residency program was first established in Saudi Arabia back in 2019. Purpose We sought to survey the trainees' current experience across the country to establish a baseline for the different training aspects and to tackle any challenges that might go unnoticed. Materials and methods This is a cross-sectional survey-based study that targeted all residents enrolled in the Saudi radiation oncology training program, except the first-year residents. The trainees received an anonymous online questionnaire aiming to assess their involvement in every aspect of the daily workflow. Results A total of 13 eligible radiation oncology residents in Saudi Arabia were included. Eleven residents completed the survey with a national response rate of 85%. Nine (82%) of the trainees reported that they review the contours and the treatment plans with their attendings in person and this method of review is the preferred one over the hybrid method as it provides better teaching quality, interactivity, and prompt feedback. Most respondents do not review offline (7, 64%) or online (6, 55%) cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans with their attendings, citing the limited involvement in the approval process. Conclusion This study uncovered a need for better resident integration into day-to-day clinical workflow, particularly in CBCT review and approval. Addressing the current concerns will enhance the educational experience and future practice. Acknowledging the limitations of our study, we observed that certain deficiencies in core competencies reported in long-established North American programs align with our findings. This underscores the need for addressing these gaps through continuous and unbiased evaluations of radiation oncology residency training programs to enhance the educational experience and ensure high-quality preparation for independent practice.
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.