Physics & Radbio

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Members don't see this ad.
firewicket said:
I think the sooner everyone accepts that ARRO/ASTRO/the ABR doesn't care at all about you...the sooner you will accept these circumstances. Its not worth your anguish...just accept it and move on.
Click to expand...

At some point the barriers to entry erected by the ABR become so egregious that something needs to be done/heads need to roll. If, for example, they suddenly made every question on the physics a complicated MU calc question without any warning that exam was changing to become a calculation-based exam appropriate for medical physicists, 90% of people failed, and told us it was the same exam and it was our fault, should we just "accept it and move on?" Of course not. I, and apparently many others, argued that the outrageous bio exam content and high bar on the physics exam this year resulting in a 50% overall fail rate well exceeded the threshold of egregiousness to demand action.

To the large number of our peers with only 2s and 3s on both exams who passed, please remember that you were likely only a few questions away from failing and passed with some lucky guesses. Imagine how you would feel if you zigged when you should have zagged a couple of times and you were in this boat too. Please don't forget about the 90-100 of us experiencing a failure on at least one exam this year and speak up as well. Add your comments to the KevinMD article when it comes out. Letters to the ABR have proved useless. Publicity and public outcry is the only way to effect change in attitude and leadership at the board level.

There needs to be a change in Radiation Oncology leadership at the ABR. Period. I hope our chairs and PDs can see how serious an issue this is and that it goes far beyond just inconveniencing a few whiny residents.
 
RadOncG said:
An article describing the resident experience with this exam and questioning it's utility was written and accepted on KevinMD. It will be published online and distributed through social media channels in 1-3 weeks. Writing emails to all those acronyms may be helpful but the outcome is that they will get some study guides out and it will be over.

The ABR responds to public criticism. If you want more answers from them in future communications then attach this article and ask for their comments. When it is published it will be important to comment and share on social media. This will increase the reach throughout the mostly physician community that follows his content.

Thank you to the test takers that have contributed to writing of the article. There is no reason to be scared into silence. The ABR answers to us, we do not answer to them.
Click to expand...

I hope that the article gets linked when published to KevinMD, and more importantly, that it isn't as extreme as some of the responses in this thread have been. A calm pen is necessary, IMO, when publicly broadcasting one's laundry.
 
Unfortunately I think a protest at Astro would go over just as well as that staged by Colin Kaepernick...

(And yes, I am implicitly comparing ABR and Wallner to the NFL and Roger Goodell)
 
evilbooyaa said:
I hope that the article gets linked when published to KevinMD, and more importantly, that it isn't as extreme as some of the responses in this thread have been. A calm pen is necessary, IMO, when publicly broadcasting one's laundry.
Click to expand...

Sometimes you need to go into a fight with teeth. There is a difference between writing a stark raving stream-of-consciousness rant and writing a factually correct yet hostile argument. Residency instills cowardice as there is no protection from retribution for speaking one's mind so there is a lot of fear of making an actual accusation and instead you get a lot of overly diplomatic banter with excessive concession-making with the actual aggression channeled into ineffective passive aggressive comments (the kind that you can make and not have to publicly stand beside and defend). Wallner and the ABR are not our friends. They have assaulted us with their exam and personally insulted us and our programs in response to our reasonable inquiries. We are defending ourselves. We do not need to be friendly and courteous to them. This is counter-productive at this point.
 
evilbooyaa said:
I hope that the article gets linked when published to KevinMD, and more importantly, that it isn't as extreme as some of the responses in this thread have been. A calm pen is necessary, IMO, when publicly broadcasting one's laundry.
Click to expand...

I completely disagree. I think the ABR and Wallner need to be called out. This cowardly attitude that our field encourages is one of the reasons we are stuck in this situation. Half of the current PGY 5s failing is not right. The ABR is not right. So fix your mistake and be transparent. Provide better guidelines in the future. For being a field that is so technical, peer reviewed, and systematic it seems very problematic that our leadership has too much pride for admission of mistake.
 
Promised to leave, but will keep this short since it addresses a point I made prior to the pass rates.

Physics pass rate was 70%. Physics does not have a new curriculum. Physics does not test obscure proteins. Physics material has probably had minimal change over 10 years, exception of AAPM QA updates and some proton introduction. There is no ""physicsistheworst" user name or crusade against physics as relevant topic (not yet at least).

I understand that by setting the correct % to pass a test can be made more difficult than previous years, and that is probably part of it. But after multiple people bashing radbio over and over and the emphasis on unfair materials and test questions, how do you possibly explain the physics pass rate as solely the fault of the ABR? Apparently they even released the correct % to pass, and while the highest ever, there were other years with the same correct % to pass for content that has not changed in years and with no reinvention of particle behavior, machine QA, or photon interactions with matter.

I would also add my points about physics are not to belittle or be insulting, but certainly it calls into question this theory that this exam was a torrent of new information or exam question topics unfairly forced on the trainees. And if ADROP and ARRO choose to wage a campaign board exams, then the physics result with all I just stated needs to be explained and part of the equation.
 
DebtRising said:
Promised to leave, but will keep this short since it addresses a point I made prior to the pass rates.

Physics pass rate was 70%. Physics does not have a new curriculum. Physics does not test obscure proteins. Physics material has probably had minimal change over 10 years, exception of AAPM QA updates and some proton introduction. There is no ""physicsistheworst" user name or crusade against physics as relevant topic (not yet at least).

I understand that by setting the correct % to pass a test can be made more difficult than previous years, and that is probably part of it. But after multiple people bashing radbio over and over and the emphasis on unfair materials and test questions, how do you possibly explain the physics pass rate as solely the fault of the ABR? Apparently they even released the correct % to pass, and while the highest ever, there were other years with the same correct % to pass for content that has not changed in years and with no reinvention of particle behavior, machine QA, or photon interactions with matter.

I would also add my points about physics are not to belittle or be insulting, but certainly it calls into question this theory that this exam was a torrent of new information or exam question topics unfairly forced on the trainees. And if ADROP and ARRO choose to wage a campaign board exams, then the physics result with all I just stated needs to be explained and part of the equation.
Click to expand...

I posted this already, but my opinion was that the physics bar was intentionally raised to account for the expected increase in rad bio failures so that failure rates would be consistent with both exams so as not to point to a problem with the exam and rather a problem with the residents. My theory was supported by the ABR's admission that the physics cutscore was the highest it had been in 5 years (and likely longer). What happened was that this backfired for the ABR. They could have gotten away with sneaking in a little new weed-out content and lowering the pass rate to mid-80s. Instead they went balls to the wall and half of residents ended up with some kind of failure on this exam.

IMO, the very low physics pass rate without a change in physics test content provides very strong evidence that there was an intentional effort to lower pass rates this year. If you are pushing the Wallner/Kachnic lie that we really all are just that much dumber (5 standard deviations), you can kindly GTFO.

Also re: "the theory that this exam was a torrent of new information or exam question topics unfairly forced on the trainees" -- It's not a theory. A stupid amount of the content was not in the study guides and textbooks everyone has been using for years. We experienced it firsthand. You did not. You have no idea what you are talking about.
 
Last edited:
I have been trying to follow this thread. Almost feel gaslighted. If I had failed a board exam and knew nigh 50% had failed, I'd be enraged. Maybe it's time to go an alternate route? ACRO?

Re: Dr. Wallner, I have had one interaction pretty much. Poorly paraphrasing Shakespeare, I come not to bury Wallner but not to praise him either. He used to post on radiotherapy.com. If you try that address now, it is not what it was 15 years ago. However we have The Wayback Machine. I'd encourage all you (failing! and non-failing!) kids to check out Katin's columns especially. They give a fascinating insight into how our specialty has changed through the (relatively recent) years. There was a blog, sort of an internet message board thingy. I'd get on there. Wallner would say some... interesting... things; I think some are still there (on The Wayback Machine). Years later, I'd have an interaction with him where he claimed--in essence and in brief--that whole brain radiotherapy couldn't be delivered using IMRT. Reason? "The fields are too big, and when they're that big it's not IMRT." Sanctimony is fine, I suppose, but improperly aimed sanctimony can kill combatants as well as innocent civilians.
 
Last edited:
So Wallner really cares about protecting his money rather than making sure new grads know their rad bio, huh? Nah, it's all about rad bio and the dumb residents. Pretty hilarious reading all of those decade-old opinions showcasing greed in the specialty.
I don't see how this is surprising to anyone.
It's clear they are trying to artificially limit supply by screwing with the pipeline. I know some here are ecstatic about the ABR turning into a cartel. What's going to happen to profits when there is a glut of non-board certified docs out there. Where will they work and how will they get paid?
That would certainly be something the anti-greedy-physician NYT would be interested in.
 
Anyone else find it curious that historical pass rates for medical physics are also in the 70% range? I hope this is not the new normal.

Part 1 – General: Three-Year Average Results

First-Time Takers Enrolled in a CAMPEP Program
Exam Dates Average Percentage Failing Average Percentage Passing Average Total Examinees
2014 – 2016 31% 69% 192

Part 1 – Clinical: Three-Year Average Results

First-Time Takers Enrolled in a CAMPEP Program
Exam Dates Average Percentage Failing Average Percentage Passing Average Total Examinees
2014-2016 27% 73% 185
 
Historical pass rates are much higher. Check out the Amdur and Lee editorial for recent pass rates (also, I think the pass rates are buried in this thread somewhere) . Someone who is motivated can use scarbrtj's suggestion of archived web content as well.

edit- I re-read your post and see that you are referring to exam for medical physicists. I found where this came from ... ABR
 
Last edited:
I am tired of bending the knee and putting my head down. There are some puny cowardly opinions here which frankly give me the runs. OMG i would not want to go into any battle with some of you, we would get absolutely SLAUGHTERED. Wallner and Kachnic are a huge problem but they are only a symptom of a larger problem in our field. It will sooner or later eat us all alive. We are eating our young but eventually the monster will be so hungry it will eat us all!
 
The ABR has updated its website!

4. Why were pass rates for physics and radiation and cancer biology exams lower this year than in the past?
Scores in physics and radiation and cancer biology are generally lower than in clinical radiation oncology. The reasons behind these lower scores may be multi-factorial. One factor may be a lack of clarity regarding up-to-date reference study sources, and heterogeneity of teaching standards across programs. We are working with our committee chairs to develop a more useful study and reference guide for trainees and are encouraging stakeholders in the academic radiation oncology community to create greater consensus regarding curriculum content and teaching methodologies.

11. Can the ABR administer mid-year exams?
No. Due to the time and cost of producing exam content, publishing, and administering exams at Pearson VUE test centers, and the low number of candidates who would take mid-year exams, it is not logistically or fiscally feasible for the ABR to administer additional exams each year.

Wow, what a joke! I passed both in 2015 and my impression was the exam was pretty fair overall. Even if I didn't know the answer to a question, I felt the question was something that a PGY 5 rad onc resident could reasonably be expected to know (coming from a small program with piss poor teaching and no recalls). I am sorry for all of those out there suffering through this nonsense.

ABR
 
fiji128 said:
The ABR has updated its website!

4. Why were pass rates for physics and radiation and cancer biology exams lower this year than in the past?
Scores in physics and radiation and cancer biology are generally lower than in clinical radiation oncology. The reasons behind these lower scores may be multi-factorial. One factor may be a lack of clarity regarding up-to-date reference study sources, and heterogeneity of teaching standards across programs. We are working with our committee chairs to develop a more useful study and reference guide for trainees and are encouraging stakeholders in the academic radiation oncology community to create greater consensus regarding curriculum content and teaching methodologies.

11. Can the ABR administer mid-year exams?
No. Due to the time and cost of producing exam content, publishing, and administering exams at Pearson VUE test centers, and the low number of candidates who would take mid-year exams, it is not logistically or fiscally feasible for the ABR to administer additional exams each year.

Wow, what a joke! I passed both in 2015 and my impression was the exam was pretty fair overall. Even if I didn't know the answer to a question, I felt the question was something that a PGY 5 rad onc resident could reasonably be expected to know (coming from a small program with piss poor teaching and no recalls). I am sorry for all of those out there suffering through this nonsense.

ABR
Click to expand...

What a load of paternalistic horsecrap. Multifactorial... ssshhhhhh... there was one factor only, the one they refuse to admit. They made the test unreasonably difficult far exceeding the difficulty in previous years. Study sources don't suddenly become not "up-to-date" over a period of one year, even in the most rapidly evolving field (and we all know how rapidly evolving classical radiation biology is!). Their obvious lies are infuriating and insulting.

I am glad they are doubling down on this idiocy and patronizing language. More pissed off chairs and PDs makes increases the likelihood that the radiation biology genius, Paul Wallner, DO, will be fired.

Regarding the mid-year exams. I wouldn't call 50% (~100 test takers) a "low number," we have to pay a $640 re-take fee anyway so LOL at the ABR lying that they would lose money with a re-take, and there is no need to produce new content. Just give everyone the exam that was given in 2016 or 2015. If the exam didn't change and recalls don't exist, then what's your argument against that, ABR?
 
Last edited:
KHE88 said:
What a load of paternalistic horsecrap. Multifactorial... ssshhhhhh... there was one factor only, the one they refuse to admit. They made the test unreasonably difficult far exceeding the difficulty in previous years. Study sources don't suddenly become not "up-to-date" over a period of one year, even in the most rapidly evolving field (and we all know how rapidly evolving classical radiation biology is!). Their obvious lies are infuriating and insulting.

I am glad they are doubling down on this idiocy and patronizing language. More pissed off chairs and PDs makes increases the likelihood that the radiation biology genius, Paul Wallner, DO, will be fired.

Regarding the mid-year exams. I wouldn't call 50% (~100 test takers) a "low number," we have to pay a $640 re-take fee anyway so LOL at the ABR lying that they would lose money with a re-take, and there is no need to produce new content. Just give everyone the exam that was given in 2016 or 2015. If the exam didn't change and recalls don't exist, then what's your argument against that, ABR?
Click to expand...

Welp that update was just more hot garbage, not really a helpful answer at all. I’ve kept pushing for more information with the ABR emails but am reaching a dead end. Very interested to see what the discussion at astro or the kevinMD editorial will generate. I hope that those of us from this years exam are not sol, but kinda seems that way...
 
LOL, can't make this stuff up. Their new and improved website defends the validity of their scoring method by referencing this website:
https://wikivisually.com/wiki/Standard-setting_study

As if referencing wikipedia wasn't bad enough.

Direct quote from "wikivisually":

This cutscore then represents the score which the panel estimates a minimally competent candidate would get. This is of course subject to decision biases such as the overconfidence bias.

What a bunch of *****s. They are advertising how horrible their certification process of doctors is. They are going to get absolutely destroyed in the academic and probably lay press. Watching the public downfall of the ABR radiation oncology leadership will be amusing.
 
sphinx2019 said:
Personal View: Failures can be the pillars of success

If there is one thing doctors fail at, it is failure. Both examiners and examinees should take a step back from defensive mode, so everyone can move on.
Click to expand...
You may have a point if it was the clinical exam, but there is no reason for a separate radbio exam, let alone one filled with esoterica. Why doesnt medon, gynonc etc have a separate cancer bio exam? I agree with the point about this being a symptom of a larger problem: cadre of self-interested "leaders," who will end up wrecking the field at a vulnerable time.
 
Thank you to everyone again for all of their emails and feedback. ARRO and ACRO resident committees have submitted a letter to the ABR as well as to a journal for publication. We hope to make our letter public soon. Thank you for your patience and we will continue to advocate for radiation oncology residents.
 
ARRO official 2018 said:
Thank you to everyone again for all of their emails and feedback. ARRO and ACRO resident committees have submitted a letter to the ABR as well as to a journal for publication. We hope to make our letter public soon. Thank you for your patience and we will continue to advocate for radiation oncology residents.
Click to expand...

Thank you, but the ABR is making it clear that they are unwilling to behave anywhere close to reasonably. They are openly hostile and lying to literally everyone in this field. Their actions have undermined the trust in the system and pose a serious threat to our specialty as long as certain individuals in this organization are allowed to use exams to personally carry out vendettas and act without oversight to artificially manipulate failure rates. This is a good start (and I hope your letters have teeth - we are past the point of polite inquiry), but ultimately fixing this problem is going to require more than letters.
 
RickyScott said:
You may have a point if it was the clinical exam, but there is no reason for a separate radbio exam, let alone one filled with esoterica. Why doesnt medon, gynonc etc have a separate cancer bio exam? I agree with the point about this being a symptom of a larger problem: cadre of self-interested "leaders," who will end up wrecking the field at a vulnerable time.
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly, and I will add that many of these "leaders" are on their way out the door. So effectively they are sabotaging things before they leave. While other "leaders" are too shortsighted to see this, and have relegated themselves to signing emails and letters filled with embarrassing nonsense (particularly embarrassing for a field that prides itself on its ability to interpret data). But this really should not be a fight for the residents. They have no power. Either attendings fight this fight, or we move on. I mean an easy move would be to boycott the ABR. If residents want to take the exam, they can do it as graduates. That cuts them off entirely from residency programs. Will that happen? I doubt it. I doubt anything will. The fact of the matter is that 90 program directors (physicians leaders at world renown hospitals) should have more power in this field (and in medicine overall) than a board made up of a few misguided individuals--a board that has already proven itself dubious at best.
 
11. Can the ABR administer mid-year exams?
No. Due to the time and cost of producing exam content, publishing, and administering exams at Pearson VUE test centers, and the low number of candidates who would take mid-year exams, it is not logistically or fiscally feasible for the ABR to administer additional exams each year.


Keep in mind that at the end of 2016, the ABR had only $49,000,000 in assets (though this might have been slightly higher if they didn't elect to spend $1,500,000 on conferences/ meetings that year at 5 star resorts in exotic locations). Given the paltry $640 we give them each year, staying at a Four Seasons trumps a re-take any day of the week.
 
Currently attending the Radiation Research Society meeting in Chicago. Plenty of the biology educators are (almost) as P.O.'ed at the ABR as residents are, as we have also been unjustly blamed for this fiasco. Of course, equally as many had no clue about any of this, seeing as - god forbid - the actual teachers should be informed about such things.

Trust me though, they know about it now. :whistle:
 
That is a lot of money. How does that work? Where does this money come from and where is it?



YellowDiamond said:
Keep in mind that at the end of 2016, the ABR had only $49,000,000 in assets (though this might have been slightly higher if they didn't elect to spend $1,500,000 on conferences/ meetings that year at 5 star resorts in exotic locations). Given the paltry $640 we give them each year, staying at a Four Seasons trumps a re-take any day of the week.
Click to expand...
 
MadamCurie said:
Currently attending the Radiation Research Society meeting in Chicago. Plenty of the biology educators are (almost) as P.O.'ed at the ABR as residents are, as we have also been unjustly blamed for this fiasco. Of course, equally as many had no clue about any of this, seeing as - god forbid - the actual teachers should be informed about such things.

Trust me though, they know about it now. :whistle:
Click to expand...

I do like that the ABR put it on the residents, rad bio instructors, and the PDs of residency programs. Hopefully a group with actual power can enact some changes in ABR leadership.
 
Not too familiar with non-profit financials but the asset breakdown is as follows: $12.2 in cash, $27.5 in securities, and $8.3 in real estate. They raised $16.2 million from "certification fees". All of this can be found on recent IRS filings.
 
YellowDiamond said:
Not too familiar with non-profit financials but the asset breakdown is as follows: $12.2 in cash, $27.5 in securities, and $8.3 in real estate. They raised $16.2 million from "certification fees". All of this can be found on recent IRS filings.
Click to expand...

If anti-trust laws don't apply to this organization, then I don't know where they would apply.
 
sphinx2019 said:
If anti-trust laws don't apply to this organization, then I don't know where they would apply.
Click to expand...

It's more an issue with the specialty boards in general, and the ABMS that only recognizes a single board for each specialty. It's a cartel and the nature of the system allows them to get away with whatever they want. I.e., it breeds corruption.

Why are we even under the ABR anyway?
Now seems like as good a time as any to break away and form the ABRO and build a reasonable certification process and eliminate MOC. The poor radiologists might be stuck with the ABR snakes forever, but I would think we could make a decent argument to ABMS that we need our own independent board and have been harmed by the ABR not acting in our best interests.
 
KHE88 said:
It's more an issue with the specialty boards in general, and the ABMS that only recognizes a single board for each specialty. It's a cartel and the nature of the system allows them to get away with whatever they want. I.e., it breeds corruption.

Why are we even under the ABR anyway?
Now seems like as good a time as any to break away and form the ABRO and build a reasonable certification process and eliminate MOC. The poor radiologists might be stuck with the ABR snakes forever, but I would think we could make a decent argument to ABMS that we need our own independent board and have been harmed by the ABR not acting in our best interests.
Click to expand...

There already exists an organization like this: National Board of Physicians and Surgeons - Board Certification
It arose out of the blatant corruption from ABIM.
 
I’m discussing with a lawyer and might be able to get pro bono work. This is a pretty easy case, and completely oversteps. The ABR is full of smoke and mirrors that just won’t hold up. They’re offering zero solution to the 50ish percent of residents that THEY failed this year by writing an innaproprite test with grading measures that were totally innacurate.
 
Saw this in my inbox last week

Landmark Opinion from the Justice Department about MOC National Board of Physicians and Surgeons

This week, the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division issued a landmark opinion about MOC, vindicating NBPAS’s long-held position that alternative organizations are needed to promote competition in physician certification. In an opinion letter, the DOJ validated the NPBAS four year struggle to make continuous physician certification more meaningful and less burdensome. This public position by the DOJ should be emphasized by physicians and other stakeholders as they ask hospital boards and insurance companies to accept alternative certification organizations when setting criteria for hospital privileges and payer contracts.

The DOJ opinion letter came in response to a pending Maryland bill promoting competition in physician certification that was introduced by NBPAS board member and Maryland legislator Dr. Dan Morhaim. The DOJ explained that the ABMS Program on MOC may have the effect of “harming competition and increasing the cost of healthcare services to customers.” ABMS may do so “by imposing overly burdensome conditions on physicians who wish to maintain their certification.” The DOJ added, with respect to ABMS, “[the] vast majority of [its] board members are medical doctors”—i.e., “active market participants”—who may have incentives to limit competition through “industry self-regulation.” As a result, the DOJ warned, “there would be competition concerns, if dominant certifying bodies [like ABMS] set de facto participation requirements that did not sufficiently correspond to health, safety, or other procompetitive justifications.”
Click to expand...
 
Gfunk6 said:
There already exists an organization like this: National Board of Physicians and Surgeons - Board Certification
It arose out of the blatant corruption from ABIM.
Click to expand...

So what does that mean if you are "board certified" by an organization other than the ABMS cartel? Employers require "BE/BC" docs. Will they buy into the NBPAS for docs who choose not to pay ABIM dues and get certified/maintain certification?

I would argue that we have "blatant corruption" now in the ABR. From what I understand the ABIM got burned extorting fees from internists and using them to support lavish lifestyles for the board members. The ABR spent 1.5 million on "conferences" last year in exotic locations. If it was discovered that a public servant did this, there would be national outcry. Imagine if it was discovered that your local police department had a conference in Fiji.

RadOncLazers said:
I’m discussing with a lawyer and might be able to get pro bono work. This is a pretty easy case, and completely oversteps. The ABR is full of smoke and mirrors that just won’t hold up. They’re offering zero solution to the 50ish percent of residents that THEY failed this year by writing an innaproprite test with grading measures that were totally innacurate.
Click to expand...

I am not a lawyer. If there is ANY avenue for actually serving the ABR with a lawsuit, I would support it 100%. Initially I was thinking calls for suing were silly and juvenile. I have completely changed my mind with the way this has unfolded and the ABR's ridiculous official statement. I would love to see them slapped with a RICO suit for this. Even if it gets thrown out, bringing the ABR into court under RICO would be the impetus for serious change.

ZdoggMD, if you're reading, this debacle is begging for you and your audience.
 
KHE88 said:
So what does that mean if you are "board certified" by an organization other than the ABMS cartel? Employers require "BE/BC" docs. Will they buy into the NBPAS for docs who choose not to pay ABIM dues and get certified/maintain certification?

I would argue that we have "blatant corruption" now in the ABR. From what I understand the ABIM got burned extorting fees from internists and using them to support lavish lifestyles for the board members. The ABR spent 1.5 million on "conferences" last year in exotic locations. If it was discovered that a public servant did this, there would be national outcry. Imagine if it was discovered that your local police department had a conference in Fiji.



I am not a lawyer. If there is ANY avenue for actually serving the ABR with a lawsuit, I would support it 100%. Initially I was thinking calls for suing were silly and juvenile. I have completely changed my mind with the way this has unfolded and the ABR's ridiculous official statement. I would love to see them slapped with a RICO suit for this. Even if it gets thrown out, bringing the ABR into court under RICO would be the impetus for serious change.

ZdoggMD, if you're reading, this debacle is begging for you and your audience.
Click to expand...

Working on it, and I think it’s totally appropriate. They have overreached and are unjustifiably injuring half the current PGY5 residents. And they claim the exam cost too much money? That’s such a ridiculous claim.
 
Hi Everyone,

Glad to see the continued efforts here. I don't think we should lose sight of the fact that what we want is a fair and reasonable outcome for the class of 2019. The pass rates are now out, they are 3-4 standard deviations below the prior 15 years and it is obvious that something is wrong. While even a mid-term exam might be nice to help get us back on track with our peers, would that really be a 'fair' result for us? It's unreasonable that we are even in this uncompromising position. We should continue pushing for a better solution than this. I have two questions I was hoping to have some discussion about on this forum:


1. The KevinMD article: this is a great start. The ARRO publication will be great as well. When they are out, where can we post/share them to publicize? What twitter accounts, facebook pages (ABR, ARRO) etc can it be posted on to spread the word? I would also think that the class of 2020 (and beyond) would have a keen interest in helping us share the word and raise our voice as this should be very concerning for them as well.


2. For those talking about litigation, I would be hesitant to do this unless it was a last resort. However, what I would like to hear from those that support it is-- what exactly would the litigation entail? What would we claim the ABR is doing and what outcome would we receive? In other words, lets say we sue the ABR... what are we technically suing them over and what is the outcome we are asking for. The court says 'congratulations, you win ______________________'. What is the win you would be pursuing?
 
Last edited:
This mess with the bio exam has brought to light bigger issues with the ABR that still need to be dealt with. Yes, they need to re-examine the exam and yes they need to let us retake a different exam. They are foolishly digging their heels in the sand (the reason I feel clearly is to assert their power/dominance) as they could probably shut this whole nasty discussion down about their money and scandalous operation by simply just giving us another damn test in December.

Regarding litigation, I don't know what kind of lawyer you have been talking to. I think trying to go after them with something like RICO would require the efforts of a major firm, which would be very expensive. I would be more than willing to donate the $640 the ABR charges me to legal fees. Hell, lets make it an even $1,000. If all 100 people who failed did that -- there's $100k right there. A GoFundMe for the rest. Very do-able with the publicity this is about to generate. Keep us informed about any legal options that come up.

Given the option of having them re-examine the test and pass me, I would much rather go through the inconvenience of taking the bio exam again next year if it means we get to see the ABR burn and their leaders fall. I honestly care more about that now than trying to get out of taking the exam again next July.
 
I agree that we need to work on disseminating these articles. Please post your ideas so they can be discussed with residency programs. I also am not opposed to making flyers for ASTRO. I’ll keep updated on a more litigious pursuit. I think we could easily raise enough money.
 
Keep it professional. People are entitled to post their opinions, propose actions, and critique such opinions and actions in a professional way. Posts that simply make fun of the current discussion, personally attack posters, or are otherwise not professional and/or contributory to the discussion will be removed with account warnings.
 
Could try posting something on the White Coat Investor forum to see if the IM docs have any advice on beating back the boards. That group would probably be sympathetic, particularly if you link the pertinent surrounding timeline, i.e. the preceding opinion article and Wallner's pay from ABR and *ahem* recent "issues" professionally.

This is clearly a case of an organization not accountable to anyone running amok.
 
Last edited:
Anybody familiar with the article submitted to journal who can comment on level of bite? Is it a firm article or more toothless than a nursing home? sometimes people apologize so much they take politeness to a ridiculous fawning.
 
RadOncLazers said:
I agree that we need to work on disseminating these articles. Please post your ideas so they can be discussed with residency programs. I also am not opposed to making flyers for ASTRO. I’ll keep updated on a more litigious pursuit. I think we could easily raise enough money.
Click to expand...

Bet it makes the rounds on twitter. Several rad oncs with thousands of (likely professional) followers.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 
Last edited:
Chartreuse Wombat said:
ABD 2017 and 2018 Certification Exam Results
Click to expand...

Well it’s encouraging to see one board willing to re evaluate exam results.

The ABRs unwillingness to help rectify this situation is causing excessive unnecessary stress, personal financial strain, loss of training time / focus as a PGY 5, and possible job implications. It’s an archaic board with unchecked leadership that has perverse goals demonstrated by prior commentary. Something needs to be done.
 
Do we have any more details on the issue with the ABD exam? They said in the above link that 'The error occurred on exams in which an answer was left blank. According to the psychometric company, a code in the company’s analysis software resulted in a frame shift for subsequent answers. This shift caused answers that were correct to have been erroneously graded as incorrect.'

If the ABR uses the same psychometric company then this is certainly worth looking into (and if nothing more just backs the argument that they should be evaluating things further instead of assuming the issue was just that residents got significantly dumber overnight). It looks like the ABD used Arbet Consulting as their psychometric company.

We have been quick to blame the ABR for the error (and they have been quick to blame us). The ABR should be investigating this without our prompting. But could there be a source for this issue that is outside the ABR (i.e. Pearson VUE or a 3rd party)?
 
Last edited:
For a test to be legally defensible, two standards must be met:
1. Validity: The test must measure what the students are expected to know. This is accomplished by writing test questions that align with the objectives.
2. Reliability: The test must produce consistent results time after time. That is, the test should produce the same score if administered to the same students again and again.

https://www.questionmark.com/sites/default/files/PDF/2012_pd_uscg.pdf
 
sphinx2019 said:
For a test to be legally defensible, two standards must be met:
1. Validity: The test must measure what the students are expected to know. This is accomplished by writing test questions that align with the objectives.
2. Reliability: The test must produce consistent results time after time. That is, the test should produce the same score if administered to the same students again and again.

https://www.questionmark.com/sites/default/files/PDF/2012_pd_uscg.pdf
Click to expand...



I agree. The ABR failed in both regards on this years exam. So what are we going to do about it? The point I am coming back to is.. what is our end goal? To me, it would be a fair outcome for the class of 2019. This would mean an evaluation of this years Rad Bio and Physics exams to see what went wrong and adjust the passing rates accordingly so they fall in line with prior years. A midterm make up (which they have already said they won't do) still punishes the class of 2019 and makes us take our attention/preparation away from clinical radiation oncology as we are about to enter the work force.

I am hopeful that ARRO and ADROP can accomplish this with the ABR at ASTRO this year. We owe our leadership that opportunity. If they cannot, then maybe we need to consider other routes. For those saying a lawsuit is the way to go I would just want to hear your rationale. Multiple people have suggested litigation, but none have said what the goal/outcome of litigation would be.. Is it to force the ABR to reassess the exam for the class of 2019 and find a fair resolution (the crux of this issue)? So far it sounds like more of a.. 'they are a monopoly so we are gonna burn this mother down!' But that's not a goal/outcome. I'm just trying to prompt you to get a clear idea of what you are trying to accomplish.

Similarly, if we are going to speak with lawyers perhaps we should be investigating which law firms have represented physicians in similar lawsuits. The lawyers that represented the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (as an example) would already have the lay of the land and be much more likely to be successful.
 
End goal is a refund of your fees. That's all you can ask for. Everything else is implicit.

mikezab said:
I agree. The ABR failed in both regards on this years exam. So what are we going to do about it? The point I am coming back to is.. what is our end goal? To me, it would be a fair outcome for the class of 2019. This would mean an evaluation of this years Rad Bio and Physics exams to see what went wrong and adjust the passing rates accordingly so they fall in line with prior years. A midterm make up (which they have already said they won't do) still punishes the class of 2019 and makes us take our attention/preparation away from clinical radiation oncology as we are about to enter the work force.

I am hopeful that ARRO and ADROP can accomplish this with the ABR at ASTRO this year. We owe our leadership that opportunity. If they cannot, then maybe we need to consider other routes. For those saying a lawsuit is the way to go I would just want to hear your rationale. Multiple people have suggested litigation, but none have said what the goal/outcome of litigation would be.. Is it to force the ABR to reassess the exam for the class of 2019 and find a fair resolution (the crux of this issue)? So far it sounds like more of a.. 'they are a monopoly so we are gonna burn this mother down!' But that's not a goal/outcome. I'm just trying to prompt you to get a clear idea of what you are trying to accomplish.

Similarly, if we are going to speak with lawyers perhaps we should be investigating which law firms have represented physicians in similar lawsuits. The lawyers that represented the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (as an example) would already have the lay of the land and be much more likely to be successful.
Click to expand...
 
mikezab said:
I agree. The ABR failed in both regards on this years exam. So what are we going to do about it? The point I am coming back to is.. what is our end goal? To me, it would be a fair outcome for the class of 2019.
Click to expand...

The end goal with civil litigation would be damages. Not just simply asking for a refund of the $640 ABR fee for the year, but also seeking compensatory damages including fees, loss of earnings from delay in securing a job, and time/expense spent restudying for the exam as well a punitive damages for emotional distress. The courts will not instruct the ABR to offer an early re-take or require outside re-examination of the exam to pass more people. And a legal outcome would never happen before next year anyway. The point of litigation would be to punish the ABR for their actions, and civilly that is done with money (in case you haven't noticed that is what the ABR is all about). Criminally it is done with prison. The is never going to happen prior to next year's exam anyway. The only way this would ever happen would be through a settlement or through ADROP or SCAROP being able to talk sense into the heartless and greedy elites that run the ABR.

The question is no longer what can they do for me so I don't have to take this exam next year? The question is what do we do to hold those responsible for this injustice accountable? Individual letters and anonymous internet posts are tapped out. We need collective action.
 
KHE88 said:
T. I think trying to go after them with something like RICO would require the efforts of a major firm, which would be very expensive.
Click to expand...

Some basic legal education, it is NEVER RICO. If you include the letters RICO in a federal lawsuit it is essentially an automatic dismissal.

Lawsplainer: IT'S NOT RICO, DAMMIT

This is not to call you out personally, but as I said some basic legal education.

(FWIW: The linked website belongs to a former assistant US Attorney who is now a criminal defense attorney.)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
ABR Radbio/Physics passing score thresholds [Resurfacing the discussion]
Replies
17
Views
4K
Neuronix
Neuronix
MudPhud20XX
Radbio study group anyone interested in it?
Replies
2
Views
647
evilbooyaa
evilbooyaa
elementaryschooleconomics
Radbio/Physics boards preparation (2020 edition)
Replies
19
Views
10K
maruchan
M
R
Hardcore Physics Discussion
Replies
20
Views
2K
Lamount
L
atomicMD2025
ABR Radbio/Physics/Clinical Exam
Replies
1
Views
2K
xrthopeful
X
Top