Practical Radiation Oncology

[deleted4401]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Really was looking forward to this journal, but not much "practical" stuff in it. Thought it would discuss clinical issues of importance to the practicing rad-onc, like going through the "horses" of clinical radonc instead of the zebras ... an intermediate prostate case or a IIIA NSCLC - and working through evidence based treatment planning ... Sort of like NEJM this week discussing diag/eval/tx of strep pharyngitis this week ...

- There is a case report of real time tracking in a peds patient vaginal rhabdo. Will bookmark that one for the next time I get a case like that.

- And the pre-op RT for extremity hamangiopericytoma. Have put in my "Pre-op RT for Random Diseases That I Don't Think I'll See In My Community Practice" folder.

- The steroids/Vit E/anti-coag for optic neuropathy was okay - I didn't know to consider using warfarin for these cases.

- Larynx mean dose with whole neck IMRT vs matching neck field was interesting, but a little misleading b/c if you use median use (as they did) the IMRT has higher dose to larynx, but if you use mean dose, then the two 3D techniques have higher dose (which they didn't mention).

Anyway, was hoping for a more "practical" focused journal for this simple community doc ...

-S

 

[Brim]

Me too. Hopefully this new journal will evolve into what we think it should be.

 

[Gfunk6]

Have you seen the editorial board for Practical Rad Onc? It's full of academic heavy hitters and almost seems like a cut and paste job from the Red Journal editorial board.

After the first issue (I agree the vaginal rhabdo article is classic), I'm not optimistic that things will improve anytime soon. Until they get more community docs on the editorial board that is . . .

Until then, they should consider re-naming the journal PNAIR (probably not acceptable in the red journal).

 

[radiaterMike]

I agree that PRO looks like an "old boys club" both in editors and initial papers. I think it is incumbent on the acting editorial board to make this into a practical journal, perhaps recruiting a broader editorial board. Getting some community docs on the editorial board is a good idea- although I am unsure how practical that is. Academic physicians have time allotted for academic endeavors and have made the commitment for this. Community physicians serve an important role in delivering patient care, but they have chosen a careers in which advancing academic medicine is not a high priority.

Have you seen the editorial board for Practical Rad Onc? It's full of academic heavy hitters and almost seems like a cut and paste job from the Red Journal editorial board.

After the first issue (I agree the vaginal rhabdo article is classic), I'm not optimistic that things will improve anytime soon. Until they get more community docs on the editorial board that is . . .

Until then, they should consider re-naming the journal PNAIR (probably not acceptable in the red journal).

 

[Gfunk6]

Community physicians serve an important role in delivering patient care, but they have chosen a careers in which advancing academic medicine is not a high priority.

While this is true on the surface, I think you are making a bit of a false dichotomy. There are numerous academic-oriented practices which participate in and even publish research. Therefore, I do think there are numerous community docs who would potentially be delighted to participate.

 

[kimplera]

😀 Glad to see so many are reading (the title to) my paper. 😉


We actually went back and forth with the editor regarding the practical value of the paper. Our point was that it demonstrated how we were thinking beyond prostate for this new technology. It was certainly not something we would have run a clinical trial to investigate... And, I doubt my grant reviewers will say, "Holy cow, look at this great paper, we have to fund this guy!" based on an article in a journal that won't be indexed in pubmed for at least 2 years.


If you want something different in your journal then write papers, submit them, revise them, review other papers... With a new journal there is a short period during the general population can shape the direction.

 

[Gfunk6]

If you want something different in your journal then write papers, submit them, revise them, review other papers... With a new journal there is a short period during the general population can shape the direction.

Touché

 

[cdf95cro]

Recently considered sending a paper to PRO, but MS3 co-author needed a PubMed listed article for apps, so it went to AJCO (was a not quite IJROBP level chart biopsy).

I hope it becomes to IJROBP more like Journal of Oncology Practice is to JCO (e.g. extended commentary and reviews).

 

[NFKB]

Recently had a review paper accepted to PRO. There was a back and forth exchange with the editors with a repeated call for practical guidance based on clinical trials. Figure were retooled to this effect. i.e. Tables illustrated rational treatment guidelines based on patient factors instead of quoting recurrence rates, survival rates, p values, etc. Only once these changes were made was the paper accepted. Hopefully we can look forward to this editorial push in more future papers.

 

[deleted4401]

Sorry, Kimplera!
Wasn't picking on you ... Just was hoping for something for us simple community docs to pick up and get something out of for our day-to-day practice.
I'm sure it will improve.

-S

 

[kimplera]

🙂
I agree with the sentiment expressed here and what we've expressed should be the goal of the journal.

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

I enjoyed reading the Loo editorial about changing SBRT's name to SABR or SABER. The lightsaber comment was hilarious, IMO! 😀

 

[subatomicdoc]

While this is true on the surface, I think you are making a bit of a false dichotomy. There are numerous academic-oriented practices which participate in and even publish research. Therefore, I do think there are numerous community docs who would potentially be delighted to participate.

I agree. The choice to go into community medicine doesn't preclude continuing to publish, it just makes it harder to get published...but your career's 'success' doesn't rely upon publication.

I left academics and have continued to publish. But that's how I choose to use some of my free time.

I just submitted a descriptive study on splenic dose to PRO last week that is quite practical IMHO. I'll let you know what they say.

 

[deleted4401]

Newest issue is better - that's what I was kind of hoping to see. Cool.
-S