I just destroyed that thing. Good thing I reviewed ampulla of Vater last night.....
According to our chief relative to RadBio/Physics it (in-service) is supposedly orders of magnitude easier. I cannot personally comment on this but perhaps others can.
Probably a ridiculous request but if anyone has gone through the exam and has the correct answers could you please post them, thanks.
yg
How does the test compare to the actual written boards?
If everyone did 10, wouldn't take so long...
It's lousy. I wonder who writes the damn thing.
S
If everyone did 10, wouldn't take so long...
Anyway, the test is terrible. The Education Committee of ARRO should write a letter. They actually ask about the study name/number rather than the concept of the study. The ask about the TG groups. It's lousy. I wonder who writes the damn thing. It's fine that they ask about rare cancers, but the stuff they ask about common cancers should be relevant. And the percentage questions were useless, too, b/c the answer choices would be too close together. I could go on all day. So glad I don't have to take it again.
S
Since you are one of the writers, I'm curious - why the desire to test numbers so hard and also rare cancers? For example, the question that asks for the recurrences on the CW and regional LNs with no RT in NSABP B-18 to B-27 (the ranges of percents goes from 1.5 - 7% for CW, and 1.5 - 4.5% for regional LNs) or the most common site of LN metastasis in a patient with penile cancer or the primary treatment of male urethral carcinoma or the staging of ampulla of Vater cancer. The incidence of these questions on the exam are about a 1000x higher than the incidence of the disease
With the key, would it be possible for the ACR to also list the percent of examinees that got a particular question correct? That might be helpful, as well - i.e. what I think is trivia might actually be common knowledge and something I need to know.
Lousy test was obviously written on a plane, while coming back from some nice conference.
Well I do...part of it, anyway.
And if you think it's bad now, you should have seen it 10-15 years ago, when it bore no relevance to anything (least of all the ABR Writtens), and many of the questions were even more poorly written, outdated and irrelevant than they are currently.
You have to realize that:
(a) these questions are only run by a couple of people who attempt to clarify, edit, and check for accuracy, however admittedly, they receive nowhere near the vetting that ABR questions receive;
(b) VERY few people are available, let alone willing, to write for the ACR In-Training exam, either because they have no time or incentive to do so, or else are already writing questions for the ABR Written Boards (a writer is technically not allowed to do both, as it would represent a conflict of interest); and
(c) especially with respect to the clinical questions on the In-Training exam, please realize that all 200+ questions are almost invariably written at the last minute (so no pre-editorial screening is possible), and all have to be discussed, edited and selected for inclusion on the exam by a diverse group of around 10 people during a single, 8-12 hour marathon session.
Also, interesting that some people consider the In-Training the more difficult exam, and others the Written Boards.
(My tendency is to think the In-Training is a bit easier, particularly in biology and physics, although I might be wrong.)
One thing I can state though is that the free ASTRO Radiation and Cancer Biology Practice Exam and Study Guide is deliberately pegged "higher" than both the In-Training and Written Board exams, in keeping with its main role being as a study aid.
Finally, I should mention that the ACR posts on their website a final copy of the annual In-Training exam, an answer key, and answer justifications about 3 months after the exam, so be on the lookout for it (particularly once you receive your scores). Unfortunately, they don't advertise this well, and only leave the thing online for a relatively short time period, so you gotta be quick!
I've been waiting 6 years for the birbeck granule question.
I didn't know any of the other answers.
My God! I knew I should have looked at Fallopian tube staging!!
-R
My favorite is when you look at a question after and you literally have NO IDEA how to even begin to look it up, because the answer doesn't exist
My program actually looks at these scores for possible remediation and I don't think they know what kind of ridiculous questions are asked on these things...
The sheer volume of diseases that we have extremely little or no exposure to really needs to be addressed (unless the actual boards are this way!??!?!?!?!)