Board exam: Med onc vs Rad onc

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

ProtonElectronNeutron

Full Member
2+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
32
Reaction score
93
In med/heme onc boards, they ask clinical questions (more like work up/ treatment). We get asked about the numbers and survival percentage in all the clinical trials in the world- which is such a waste, IMHO.
When is this gonna change!!

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
In med/heme onc boards, they ask clinical questions (more like work up/ treatment). We get asked about the numbers and survival percentage in all the clinical trials in the world- which is such a waste, IMHO
When is this gonna change!!



If you eliminated that then you’ve eliminated like 70% of all board questions. We don’t diagnose or really work people up. You would basically just memorize Nccn and random dosi questions then
 
Members don't see this ad :)
In med/heme onc boards, they ask clinical questions (more like work up/ treatment). We get asked about the numbers and survival percentage in all the clinical trials in the world- which is such a waste, IMHO.
When is this gonna change!!
I mean, our board certification exam is the oral boards and it doesn’t test trial knowledge at all. The clinical written board is technically just a qualifying exam. Some questions test minutiae but overall I feel the in-service exam (if it’s any reflection of written clinical) has gotten better over the years at testing trial details that do inform practice or decision making.
 
I mean, our board certification exam is the oral boards and it doesn’t test trial knowledge at all. The clinical written board is technically just a qualifying exam. Some questions test minutiae but overall I feel the in-service exam (if it’s any reflection of written clinical) has gotten better over the years at testing trial details that do inform practice or decision making.

I also think the in-service has improved in recent years, but I think the ABR and ACR have very little communication regarding what each organization tests on (which is a wasted opportunity).

Regarding clinical written boards, I also find it frustrating to be tested on things which I could easily look up in real life. I have about 1,000 ideas for how we could do this better, but given I have zero power and it seems like an insurmountable issue...I have just resigned myself to memorizing retrospective trials from MD Anderson with 16 patients.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 3 users
I also think the in-service has improved in recent years, but I think the ABR and ACR have very little communication regarding what each organization tests on (which is a wasted opportunity).

Regarding clinical written boards, I also find it frustrating to be tested on things which I could easily look up in real life. I have about 1,000 ideas for how we could do this better, but given I have zero power and it seems like an insurmountable issue...I have just resigned myself to memorizing retrospective trials from MD Anderson with 16 patients.
just pick the one where they were treated bid for at least a week.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: 5 users
I think it's fair to ask about the main conclusions of trials. But expecting us to memorize exact percentages is unnecessary. I understand I have to counsel patients on outcomes and at times give them survival and control rates. In practice, I look it up before seeing a patient and after a while it sticks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I also think the in-service has improved in recent years, but I think the ABR and ACR have very little communication regarding what each organization tests on (which is a wasted opportunity).

Regarding clinical written boards, I also find it frustrating to be tested on things which I could easily look up in real life. I have about 1,000 ideas for how we could do this better, but given I have zero power and it seems like an insurmountable issue...I have just resigned myself to memorizing retrospective trials from MD Anderson with 16 patients.
Trials? You mean the retrospective series library at MDACC that drives all management.
 
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: 2 users
Top