Dataset Information

Radiation Oncology Fellowship: a Value-Based Assessment Among Graduates of a Mature Program.

ABSTRACT: The University of Toronto - Department of Radiation Oncology (UTDRO) has had a well-established Fellowship Program for over 20 years. An assessment of its graduates was conducted to evaluate training experience and perceived impact on professional development. Graduates of the UTDRO Fellowship Program between 1991 and 2015 were the focus of our review. Current employment status was collected using online tools. A study-specific web-based questionnaire was distributed to 263/293 graduates for whom active e-mails were identified; questions focused on training experience, and impact on career progression and academic productivity. As a surrogate measure for the impact of UTDRO Fellowship training, a comparison of current employment and scholarly activities of individuals who obtained their Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of Canada (FRCPC) designation in Radiation Oncology between 2000 and 2012, with (n = 57) or without (n = 230) UTDRO Fellowship training, was conducted. Almost all UTDRO Fellowship graduates were employed as staff radiation oncologists (291/293), and most of those employed were associated with additional academic (130/293), research (53/293), or leadership (68/293) appointments. Thirty-eight percent (101/263) of alumni responded to the online survey. The top two reasons for completing the Fellowship were to gain specific clinical expertise and exposure to research opportunities. Respondents were very satisfied with their training experience, and the vast majority (99%) would recommend the program to others. Most (96%) felt that completing the Fellowship was beneficial to their career development. University of Toronto, Department of Radiation Oncology Fellowship alumni were more likely to hold university, research, and leadership appointments, and author significantly more publications than those with FRCPC designation without fellowship training from UTDRO. The UTDRO Fellowship Program has been successful since its inception, with the majority of graduates reporting positive training experiences, benefits to scholarly output, and professional development for their post-fellowship careers. Key features that would optimize the fellowship experience and its long-term impact on trainees were also identified.

SUBMITTER: Ito E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8605971 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceMedical trainees frequently experience discrimination. Understanding their experiences is essential to improving learning environments.ObjectiveTo characterize trainee experiences of discrimination and inclusion to inform graduate medical education (GME) policies.Design, setting, and participantsThis qualitative study used an anonymous telephone interview technique to gather data from hematology and oncology fellows. All current trainees and recent graduates were eligible. Interviews were conducted anonymously with interviewer and participant in separate locations and recorded and transcribed. Data were analyzed in an iterative process into major themes using a general inductive analysis approach. Demographic information was obtained via anonymous survey. Data collection and analysis were conducted from July 2018 to November 2019.Main outcomes and measuresEmergent themes illustrating bias and inclusion in a GME program.ResultsAmong 34 fellows and recent graduates who were approached for this study, 20 consented and 17 were interviewed. Of those interviewed, 10 were men, and the median (range) age was 32 (29-53) years. The racial and ethnic distribution included 6 Asian individuals, 2 Black individuals, 3 Hispanic individuals, 2 multiracial individuals, and 4 White individuals. All fellows reported having experienced and/or witnessed discriminatory behavior. The themes elucidated were (1) foreign fellows perceived as outsiders, (2) US citizens feeling alien at home, (3) gender role-typing, (4) perception of futility of reporting, (5) diversity and inclusion, and (6) coping strategies. The majority of reported biases were from patients. Only 1 trainee reported any incidents. Reasons for not reporting were difficulty characterizing discrimination and doubt action would occur. Participants reported that diversity of cotrainees, involvement in committees, and open discussions promoted inclusivity.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, reports of discriminatory behavior toward trainees were common. The anonymous hotline methodology cultivated a safe environment for candid discussions. These findings suggest that GME programs should assess their learning climate regarding bias and inclusivity anonymously and develop processes to support trainees.

Project description:Rationale & objectiveAdoption of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) into nephrology practice has been relatively slow. We surveyed US nephrology program directors, their fellows, and graduates from a single training program regarding current/planned POCUS training, clinical use, and barriers to training and use.Study designAnonymous, online survey.Setting & participantsAll US nephrology program directors (n=151), their fellows (academic year 2021-2022), and 89/90 graduates (1980-2021) of the Walter Reed Nephrology Program.Analytical approachDescriptive.Results46% (69/151) of program directors and 33% (118/361) of their fellows responded. Response rate was 62% (55/89) for Walter Reed graduates. 51% of program directors offered POCUS training, most commonly bedside training in non-POCUS oriented rotations (71%), didactic lectures (68%), and simulation (43%). 46% of fellows reported receiving POCUS training, but of these, many reported not being sufficiently trained/not confident in kidney (56%), bladder (50%), and inferior vena cava assessment (46%). Common barriers to training reported by program directors were not enough trained faculty (78%), themselves not being sufficiently trained (55%), and equipment expense (51%). 64% of program directors and 55% of fellows reported <10% of faculty were able to perform POCUS. 64% of fellows reported having too little POCUS training. 72% of program directors and 77% of graduates felt POCUS should be incorporated into the fellowship curriculum. 59% of fellows and 61% of graduates desired hands-on POCUS training rather than didactic lectures or simulation.LimitationsLoss of respondents as program directors and fellows progressed through the survey.ConclusionsNephrology program directors, fellows, and graduates surveyed want POCUS training incorporated into the fellowship curriculum. No group felt sufficiently trained to confidently perform POCUS, and the major barrier to training was lack of sufficiently trained faculty. This highlights the need to "train the trainers" before POCUS can be fully integrated into fellowship training and regularly used in nephrology practice.

Project description:PURPOSE:To examine the role of radiation oncology (RO) graduates' application patterns and personal preferences in current labor concerns. METHODS AND MATERIALS:An anonymous, voluntary survey was distributed to 665 domestic RO graduates from 2013 to 2017. Questions assessed graduates' regional (Northeast [NE]; Midwest [MW]; South [SO]; West [WT]) job type and population size preferences. Top regional choice was compared across other categorical and numerical variables using the ?2 test and analysis of variance, respectively. RESULTS:Complete responses were obtained from 299 (45.0% response rate) participants: 82 (27.4%), 74 (24.7%), 85 (28.4%), and 58 (19.4%) graduated from NE, MW, SO, and WT programs. The most to least commonly applied regions were SO (69.2%), MW (55.9%), and then NE/WT (55.2% each). The first and last regional choices were the WT (29.4%) and MW (15.7%), respectively. The most and least common application and top choice preferences were consistent in terms of city size: >500,000 (86.0% and 64.5%, respectively) and <100,001 (26.1% and 7.0%, respectively). The majority of applicants applied to both academic and nonacademic positions (60.9%), with top job type choice being equally split. The majority of respondents independently received a job offer in their preferred region (75.3%), city population size (72.6%) or job type (81.9%). Additionally, 52.5% received a job offer that included all three preferences. Those who underwent residency training (44.3% vs 62.0%-83.6%, P < .001) or medical schooling (50.7% vs 56.3%-75.6%, P < .001) or grew up in the MW (60.8% vs 70.0%-74.7%, P < .001) were least likely to choose this region as their top regional choice compared with other regions. CONCLUSIONS:The MW and jobs in smaller cities are less appealing to RO graduates, even if they receive training in the MW, which may contribute to current job market concerns. Nonetheless, the majority of respondents received a job offer in the region, population size, and job type of their top choice. Assessing prospective candidates' city size and geographic preferences and prioritizing applicants who are compatible with positions may help address potential job market discrepancies.

Project description:BackgroundPractice patterns and potential quality differences among surgical oncology fellowship graduates relative to years of independent practice have not been defined.MethodsMedicare claims were used to identify patients who underwent esophagectomy, pancreatectomy, hepatectomy, or rectal resection for cancer between 2016 and 2021. Surgical oncology fellowship graduates were identified, and the association between years of independent practice, serious complications, and 90-day mortality was examined.ResultsOverall, 11,746 cancer operations (pancreatectomy [61.2%], hepatectomy [19.5%], rectal resection [13.7%], esophagectomy [5.6%]) were performed by 676 surgical oncology fellowship graduates (females: 17.7%). The operations were performed for 4147 patients (35.3%) by early-career surgeons (1-7 years), for 4104 patients (34.9%) by mid-career surgeons (8-14 years), and for 3495 patients (29.8%) by late-career surgeons (>15 years). The patients who had surgery by early-career surgeons were treated more frequently at a Midwestern (24.9% vs. 14.2%) than at a Northeastern institution (20.6% vs. 26.9%) compared with individuals treated by late-career surgeons (p < 0.05). Surgical oncologists had comparable risk-adjusted serious complications and 90-day mortality rates irrespective of career stage (early career [13.0% and 7.2%], mid-career [12.6% and 6.3%], late career [12.8% and 6.5%], respectively; all p > 0.05). Surgeon case-specific volume independently predicted serious complications across all career stages (high vs. low volume: early career [odds ratio {OR}, 0.80; 95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.65-0.98]; mid-career [OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.66-0.99]; late career [OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62-0.97]).ConclusionAmong surgical oncology fellowship graduates performing complex cancer surgery, rates of serious complications and 90-day mortality were comparable between the early-career and mid/late-career stages. Individual surgeon case-specific volume was strongly associated with postoperative outcomes irrespective of years of independent practice or career stage.

Dataset Information

Radiation Oncology Fellowship: a Value-Based Assessment Among Graduates of a Mature Program.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets