scholarly journals Most residency programs for radiation oncology physicists do not reflect the heightened importance of medical imaging

2010 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
pp. 1939-1941
Author(s):  
X. Ronald Zhu ◽  
Rupak K. Das ◽  
Colin G. Orton
Keyword(s):  
Medical Imaging ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Residency Programs

scholarly journals Cross-Sectional Gender Analysis of US Radiation Oncology Residency Programs in 2019: More Than a Pipeline Issue?

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 1099-1103
Author(s):  
Toms Vengaloor Thomas ◽  
Teessa Perekattu Kuruvilla ◽  
Emma Holliday ◽  
Eldrin Bhanat ◽  
Amy Parr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Gender Analysis ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Residency Programs

1995 survey of physics teaching efforts in radiation oncology residency programs

1997 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 441-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric E. Klein ◽  
Bruce Gerbi ◽  
Jerome Meli ◽  
David Marsden
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Physics Teaching ◽  
Residency Programs

scholarly journals Exposure to radiation and medical oncology training: A survey of Canadian urology residents and fellows

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amandeep S. Taggar ◽  
Kevin Martell ◽  
Siraj Husain ◽  
Michael Peacock ◽  
Michael Sia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Residency Program ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Medical Oncology ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Clinical Exposure ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
Urology Residency

Introduction: Residency experiences and teaching in oncology among urology residents are variable across Canada. We sought to identify how radiation and medical oncology concepts, as they pertain to genitourinary malignancies, are taught to urology residents.Methods: A total of 190 trainees enrolled in Canadian urology residency training programs were invited to participate in the study from January 2016 to June 2016. Participants completed an online questionnaire addressing the training they received.Results: The overall response rate was 32%. Twenty-three percent of respondents were in their fellowship year; 17%, 20%, 10%, 17%, and 12% were first-, second-, third-, fourth-, and fifth-year residents, respectively, with a median of four (range 1–9) respondents from each training program. Ninety-five percent of respondents had academic half-day (AHD) as part of their training that included radiotherapy (61%) and chemotherapy (51%) teaching. Most respondents indicated their main exposure to chemotherapy and radiation came from informal teaching in urology clinics. Twentynine percent and 41%, of participants had mandatory rotations in radiation and medical oncology, respectively. Only 6% of respondents used their voluntary elective time in these disciplines and most voluntary electives were of 1–2-week duration. Despite this, 90% of respondents preferred some mandatory radiation and medical oncology training.Conclusions: Most of the limited exposure that urology residents have to medical and radiation oncology is through AHD or informal urology clinics, despite a desire among current urology trainees to have clinical exposure in these areas. Moving forward, urology residency programs should consider integrating medical and radiation oncology rotations into the residency program curriculum.

Variations among Radiation Oncology Residency Programs in the USA

2020 ◽  
Vol 108 (2) ◽  
pp. E57-E58
Author(s):  
Toms Vengaloor Thomas ◽  
Teessa Perekattu Kuruvilla ◽  
Eldrin Bhanat ◽  
Amy Parr ◽  
Srinivasan Vijayakumar
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Residency Programs ◽  
The Usa

Analysis of Resident and Faculty Assessment Methods Used by United States Radiation Oncology Residency Programs

2021 ◽  
Vol 111 (1) ◽  
pp. e6-e7
Author(s):  
Greeshma Rajeev-Kumar ◽  
Rajashri Manjunath ◽  
Rahul Tendulkar ◽  
Kimberly Corbin ◽  
Reshma Jagsi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Radiation Oncology ◽  
Assessment Methods ◽  
Faculty Assessment ◽  
Residency Programs
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document