↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of Radiology Training During Radiation Oncology Residency

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cancer Education, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Assessment of Radiology Training During Radiation Oncology Residency
Published in
Journal of Cancer Education, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s13187-018-1357-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shanna A. Matalon, Stephanie A. Howard, Matthew J. Abrams

Abstract

A strong foundation in diagnostic imaging is essential to the practice of radiation oncology. This study evaluated radiology training in radiation oncology residency. An online survey was distributed to current radiation oncology residents in the USA by e-mail in 2017. Responses were summarized using frequency and percentages and compared with chi-square test and Spearman's rank correlation when appropriate. One hundred five residents completed the survey. Although most residents felt that a strong knowledge base in diagnostic radiology was moderately or extremely important (87%, n = 90/104), the majority were only somewhat confident in their radiology skills (61%, n = 63/104) and were only somewhat, minimally, or not at all satisfied with their training (79%, n = 81/103). Although there was an association between increasing post-graduate training and confidence level (p = 0.01062, ρ = 0.24959), the majority of graduating residents feel only somewhat confident in radiology skills (63%, n = 12/19). Residents were most commonly exposed to radiology via multidisciplinary conferences (96%, n = 100/104), though only 15% (n = 16/104) of residents ranked these as the most beneficial component of their radiology training and 13% (n = 13/101) of residents felt these were the least beneficial. Most residents (60%, n = 63/105) believe there is a need for dedicated radiology training during residency, preferring monthly formal didactics (68%, n = 71/105) co-taught by a radiologist and radiation oncologist (58%, n = 61/105). Radiation oncology residents feel their radiology training is suboptimal, suggesting a need for more guidance and standardization of radiology curriculum. A preferred option may be monthly didactics co-taught by radiologists and radiation oncologists; however, future studies should assess the effectiveness of this model.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 21%
Other 2 11%
Professor 2 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Librarian 1 5%
Other 4 21%
Unknown 4 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 32%
Social Sciences 3 16%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 6 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 March 2021.
All research outputs
#4,204,739
of 23,045,021 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cancer Education
#143
of 1,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,484
of 329,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cancer Education
#5
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,045,021 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,151 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,539 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.