FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2068988461> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2068988461 endingPage "S600" @default.
• W2068988461 startingPage "S600" @default.
• W2068988461 abstract "Purpose/Objective(s)Radiation oncology curriculum development is challenging due to limited numbers of trainees at any single institution. The specific aim of this project is to implement and evaluate a uniform medical student clerkship curriculum at select academic medical centers (AMCs) following the multi-institutional cooperative group research model.Materials/MethodsA standardized curriculum was developed consisting of 3 lectures (Overview of Radiation Oncology, Radiation Biology/Physics, and Practical Aspects of Simulation/Radiation Emergencies) and an interactive hands-on planning workshop. The planning workshop exposed students to basics of contouring and treatment planning. Students were asked to complete an anonymous evaluation of the curriculum using Likert scales (1 = “not at all” to 5 = “extremely”; reported as median [interquartile range]). Non-parametric statistical tests were used.Results94 students at 11 AMCs completed the curriculum during the 2013 calendar year. 70/94 students completed evaluations, 63/70 reported an intent to pursue radiation oncology as their specialty, and 57/63 reported this was their first time completing the curriculum. Student ratings of the importance of curricular content were: Overview 4 [4-5]; Radiation Biology/Physics 5 [4-5]; Practical Aspects/Emergencies 5 [4-5]; Planning Workshop 4 [4-5]. The planning workshop improved student comfort with treatment planning (pre 2 [1-3] vs post 3 [3-4], p<0.01), and using a planning workstation (pre 2 [1-3] vs post 4 [3-4], p<0.01), and enriched their understanding of an AP/PA spine plan (pre 2 [1-3] vs post 4 [3-4], p<0.01). Students also reported the curriculum helped to understand radiation oncology as a specialty (5 [4-5]), increased specialty decision comfort (4 [3-5]), and would help the transition to radiation oncology residency (4 [4-5]). One AMC provided lectures in a recorded format which mitigated the perceived impact of the lectures. These students reported a lower score (4 [4-4] vs 5 [4-5], p<0.01). Lastly, lectures were administered by residents at 7/11 participating AMCs. Site coordinators found resident participation to be extremely useful as an educational experience to develop teaching skills (5 [3-5]).ConclusionsA standardized curriculum was successfully piloted at 11 AMCs during the 2013 calendar year, providing proof-of-principle that radiation oncology curriculum development can follow the multi-institutional cooperative group research model. Additionally, subsequent to participation in the curriculum students felt more comfortable with their specialty decision and better prepared to begin radiation oncology residency. Further curriculum enhancement for radiation oncology trainees, including both medical students and residents, can be pursued using this model. Purpose/Objective(s)Radiation oncology curriculum development is challenging due to limited numbers of trainees at any single institution. The specific aim of this project is to implement and evaluate a uniform medical student clerkship curriculum at select academic medical centers (AMCs) following the multi-institutional cooperative group research model. Radiation oncology curriculum development is challenging due to limited numbers of trainees at any single institution. The specific aim of this project is to implement and evaluate a uniform medical student clerkship curriculum at select academic medical centers (AMCs) following the multi-institutional cooperative group research model. Materials/MethodsA standardized curriculum was developed consisting of 3 lectures (Overview of Radiation Oncology, Radiation Biology/Physics, and Practical Aspects of Simulation/Radiation Emergencies) and an interactive hands-on planning workshop. The planning workshop exposed students to basics of contouring and treatment planning. Students were asked to complete an anonymous evaluation of the curriculum using Likert scales (1 = “not at all” to 5 = “extremely”; reported as median [interquartile range]). Non-parametric statistical tests were used. A standardized curriculum was developed consisting of 3 lectures (Overview of Radiation Oncology, Radiation Biology/Physics, and Practical Aspects of Simulation/Radiation Emergencies) and an interactive hands-on planning workshop. The planning workshop exposed students to basics of contouring and treatment planning. Students were asked to complete an anonymous evaluation of the curriculum using Likert scales (1 = “not at all” to 5 = “extremely”; reported as median [interquartile range]). Non-parametric statistical tests were used. Results94 students at 11 AMCs completed the curriculum during the 2013 calendar year. 70/94 students completed evaluations, 63/70 reported an intent to pursue radiation oncology as their specialty, and 57/63 reported this was their first time completing the curriculum. Student ratings of the importance of curricular content were: Overview 4 [4-5]; Radiation Biology/Physics 5 [4-5]; Practical Aspects/Emergencies 5 [4-5]; Planning Workshop 4 [4-5]. The planning workshop improved student comfort with treatment planning (pre 2 [1-3] vs post 3 [3-4], p<0.01), and using a planning workstation (pre 2 [1-3] vs post 4 [3-4], p<0.01), and enriched their understanding of an AP/PA spine plan (pre 2 [1-3] vs post 4 [3-4], p<0.01). Students also reported the curriculum helped to understand radiation oncology as a specialty (5 [4-5]), increased specialty decision comfort (4 [3-5]), and would help the transition to radiation oncology residency (4 [4-5]). One AMC provided lectures in a recorded format which mitigated the perceived impact of the lectures. These students reported a lower score (4 [4-4] vs 5 [4-5], p<0.01). Lastly, lectures were administered by residents at 7/11 participating AMCs. Site coordinators found resident participation to be extremely useful as an educational experience to develop teaching skills (5 [3-5]). 94 students at 11 AMCs completed the curriculum during the 2013 calendar year. 70/94 students completed evaluations, 63/70 reported an intent to pursue radiation oncology as their specialty, and 57/63 reported this was their first time completing the curriculum. Student ratings of the importance of curricular content were: Overview 4 [4-5]; Radiation Biology/Physics 5 [4-5]; Practical Aspects/Emergencies 5 [4-5]; Planning Workshop 4 [4-5]. The planning workshop improved student comfort with treatment planning (pre 2 [1-3] vs post 3 [3-4], p<0.01), and using a planning workstation (pre 2 [1-3] vs post 4 [3-4], p<0.01), and enriched their understanding of an AP/PA spine plan (pre 2 [1-3] vs post 4 [3-4], p<0.01). Students also reported the curriculum helped to understand radiation oncology as a specialty (5 [4-5]), increased specialty decision comfort (4 [3-5]), and would help the transition to radiation oncology residency (4 [4-5]). One AMC provided lectures in a recorded format which mitigated the perceived impact of the lectures. These students reported a lower score (4 [4-4] vs 5 [4-5], p<0.01). Lastly, lectures were administered by residents at 7/11 participating AMCs. Site coordinators found resident participation to be extremely useful as an educational experience to develop teaching skills (5 [3-5]). ConclusionsA standardized curriculum was successfully piloted at 11 AMCs during the 2013 calendar year, providing proof-of-principle that radiation oncology curriculum development can follow the multi-institutional cooperative group research model. Additionally, subsequent to participation in the curriculum students felt more comfortable with their specialty decision and better prepared to begin radiation oncology residency. Further curriculum enhancement for radiation oncology trainees, including both medical students and residents, can be pursued using this model. A standardized curriculum was successfully piloted at 11 AMCs during the 2013 calendar year, providing proof-of-principle that radiation oncology curriculum development can follow the multi-institutional cooperative group research model. Additionally, subsequent to participation in the curriculum students felt more comfortable with their specialty decision and better prepared to begin radiation oncology residency. Further curriculum enhancement for radiation oncology trainees, including both medical students and residents, can be pursued using this model." @default.
• W2068988461 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2068988461 creator A5011106523 @default.
• W2068988461 creator A5016840607 @default.
• W2068988461 creator A5019874592 @default.
• W2068988461 creator A5022535771 @default.
• W2068988461 creator A5031132761 @default.
• W2068988461 creator A5051417214 @default.
• W2068988461 creator A5053368351 @default.
• W2068988461 creator A5063250950 @default.
• W2068988461 creator A5065695316 @default.
• W2068988461 creator A5066810044 @default.
• W2068988461 creator A5072259049 @default.
• W2068988461 creator A5087237904 @default.
• W2068988461 date "2014-09-01" @default.
• W2068988461 modified "2023-10-02" @default.
• W2068988461 title "Implementation and Evaluation of a Multi-institutional Radiation Oncology Clerkship Curriculum: A Report From the Radiation Oncology Education Collaborative Study Group" @default.
• W2068988461 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.05.1798" @default.
• W2068988461 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W2068988461 type Work @default.
• W2068988461 sameAs 2068988461 @default.
• W2068988461 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2068988461 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2068988461 hasAuthorship W2068988461A5011106523 @default.
• W2068988461 hasAuthorship W2068988461A5016840607 @default.
• W2068988461 hasAuthorship W2068988461A5019874592 @default.
• W2068988461 hasAuthorship W2068988461A5022535771 @default.
• W2068988461 hasAuthorship W2068988461A5031132761 @default.
• W2068988461 hasAuthorship W2068988461A5051417214 @default.
• W2068988461 hasAuthorship W2068988461A5053368351 @default.
• W2068988461 hasAuthorship W2068988461A5063250950 @default.
• W2068988461 hasAuthorship W2068988461A5065695316 @default.
• W2068988461 hasAuthorship W2068988461A5066810044 @default.
• W2068988461 hasAuthorship W2068988461A5072259049 @default.
• W2068988461 hasAuthorship W2068988461A5087237904 @default.
• W2068988461 hasBestOaLocation W20689884611 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConcept C143998085 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConcept C19527891 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConcept C2992520072 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConcept C47177190 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConcept C509550671 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConcept C509974204 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConceptScore W2068988461C126322002 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConceptScore W2068988461C143998085 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConceptScore W2068988461C15744967 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConceptScore W2068988461C19417346 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConceptScore W2068988461C19527891 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConceptScore W2068988461C2992520072 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConceptScore W2068988461C47177190 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConceptScore W2068988461C509550671 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConceptScore W2068988461C509974204 @default.
• W2068988461 hasConceptScore W2068988461C71924100 @default.
• W2068988461 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2068988461 hasLocation W20689884611 @default.
• W2068988461 hasOpenAccess W2068988461 @default.
• W2068988461 hasPrimaryLocation W20689884611 @default.
• W2068988461 hasRelatedWork W1528970778 @default.
• W2068988461 hasRelatedWork W2060301445 @default.
• W2068988461 hasRelatedWork W2079577539 @default.
• W2068988461 hasRelatedWork W2390398707 @default.
• W2068988461 hasRelatedWork W2518707104 @default.
• W2068988461 hasRelatedWork W2528298601 @default.
• W2068988461 hasRelatedWork W2785426896 @default.
• W2068988461 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W2068988461 hasRelatedWork W4243459470 @default.
• W2068988461 hasRelatedWork W4280541321 @default.
• W2068988461 hasVolume "90" @default.
• W2068988461 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2068988461 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2068988461 magId "2068988461" @default.
• W2068988461 workType "article" @default.