Radiation oncology directors of training survey 2016: Perspectives and challenges
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: This paper reports the key findings of the first survey of Australian and New Zealand Radiation Oncology Directors of Training (DoTs) dealing with their perspectives, experiences and challenges. METHODS: The survey was conducted in September 2016 using a 34-question instrument. It was emailed to all radiation oncology DoTs listed on the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) database. The questions related to demographics, protected time, weekly activities, support, the value of curriculum assessments, challenges and suggested improvements. Respondents were assured that their responses were anonymous. RESULTS: The response rate was 59.6% (31/52). The median age of respondents was in the 41 to 45 age bracket, but nearly one quarter were over 45 years of age. The median time respondents had been in the role was three to five years (range <0.5 to >10) with the median number of trainees supervised being four (range 1-8). Thirty-five percent had a co DoT. DoTs spent a median of three hours per week on the role (range <1 to >8) with most respondents (67.7%) requiring time during and out of work performing the role, but ten percent claimed it was done out of hours only. Nearly all DoTs were aware they should have protected time, but only just half received it. The educational aspects of training dominated weekly activities, but rostering, specific trainee issues and administration were also featured. Time issues were the greatest challenge for respondents with clinical assignments the most challenging assessment. However, more emphasis on contouring and planning was thought to be required. All DoTs found the dedicated DoT workshops useful, but felt future discussions on trainees in difficulty could be emphasized. The vast majority felt supported by their training site and the College. All respondents believed in the role with most having an interest in educational activities. The majority of respondents (85%) intended to continue in the role for the next 1 to 2 years, but this dropped to 45% when asked about continuing for 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: This survey of predominantly experienced DoTs, indicated that the role was deemed to be of value in delivering optimal training. The most significant challenges faced by DoTs were finding sufficient time to deal with the responsibilities of the role and dealing with underperforming trainees. Feedback on the currently employed work based assessments will be considered as FRO transitions into programmatic assessment. Furthermore, a desire for training in how to deal with trainees in difficulty, underperforming or unsuitable trainees is noted. Future work is planned following refinements of the survey instrument; and, will also explore stress and burnout in the DoT cohort.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».