Rad (and Cancer) Bio/Physics 2019

[evilbooyaa]

Reminder to keep it vague to avoid moderation, copyright violations, etc. and subsequent thread closure on SDN.

Overall, didn't feel it was too horrible. Maybe I studied enough as being terrified of failing. Felt confident on 70-75% of questions. Less than 5-10% that I was completely in the dark on. Multiple questions (5-10) that I definitely thought had multiple correct answers.

We'll see in 4-6 weeks what the pass rates are. I'm not as confident in passing as I would've liked but felt like the level of detail requested was not outrageous. Would be interested in thoughts of those who were re-taking one or both exams as to perceived difficulty between last year and this year.

Everyone else's thoughts? Let's try to remain on-topic for this thread.

Definitely a strong minority of cancer bio (or at least completely unrelated to RT) on the exam, looks like that component is here to stay.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[KHE88]

Bio was a completely different exam this year. Very little if any repeated questions as I didn't recognize a single one.

I have a feeling the exam we just got was more similar to the 2017 and prior exams, and the 2018 was just a total outlier (as we all already knew).

Lots of bad questions, some testing the same concept over and over, wording not clear. Still, nothing like last years in terms of the minutiae.

 

[radbioistheworst]

Reminder to keep it vague to avoid moderation, copyright violations, etc. and subsequent thread closure on SDN.

Overall, didn't feel it was too horrible. Maybe I studied enough as being terrified of failing. Felt confident on 70-75% of questions. Less than 5-10% that I was completely in the dark on. Multiple questions (5-10) that I definitely thought had multiple correct answers.

We'll see in 4-6 weeks what the pass rates are. I'm not as confident in passing as I would've liked but felt like the level of detail requested was not outrageous. Would be interested in thoughts of those who were re-taking one or both exams as to perceived difficulty between last year and this year.

Everyone else's thoughts? Let's try to remain on-topic for this thread.

Definitely a strong minority of cancer bio (or at least completely unrelated to RT) on the exam, looks like that component is here to stay.

Agree 100%, but for the amount of studying I did it’s a little disheartening to be confident about 70-75% instead of 80-85%, unless the cut score will be lower this year. But who the hell knows. Congrats to everyone for being done

 

[evilbooyaa]

Bio was a completely different exam this year. Very little if any repeated questions as I didn't recognize a single one.

I have a feeling the exam we just got was more similar to the 2017 and prior exams, and the 2018 was just a total outlier (as we all already knew).

Lots of bad questions, some testing the same concept over and over, wording not clear. Still, nothing like last years in terms of the minutiae.

That's honestly kind of what I figured based on what was asked last year. Here's to hoping it was a one-year outlier so that residents don't have to worry about board pass rates on top of everything else. Of course maybe ABR will punish me by making the cut-off threshold obscenely high (like they did for physics last year)

 

[radbioistheworst]

Lots of bad questions, some testing the same concept over and over, wording not clear. Still, nothing like last years in terms of the minutiae.

For a subject with so much breadth it’s beyond me how you have effectively 5-10 repeats and don’t ask about other areas at all

 

[WVXRT]

Overall thought both tests were poorly made. Lots of terrible, confusing wording, tricky way to ask things, not straightforward, some very nitpicky. thrown off completely that multiple questions appeared to have more than one right answer. Not a “minimal competency” exam, felt like a classic weed out test we have been taking our whole life. They are going to fail many people again is my guess.

Radbio: many just badly worded questions and a good amount of zero xrt related questions, like step1 level trivia. Easy calcs. Many important concepts in “study guide” completely ignored and some things overly emphasized.

Physics: also badly made questions, calc questions on the more complicated end generally, one to two completely stomped me. Many conceptual questions, some terribly worded. Some reasonable questions.

Overall i left the test not feeling well, not like feeling terrible like i failed for sure but very dissappointed with leadership, ABR, our field. This is a complete RUSE and i have definitely some regret to have gone into a field that would put me in this situation after all i have done and sacrificed, busy all day at work and studying after hours in a bad place and having to take not one but TWO nonsensical tests. Shame on them!

 

[deleted941485]

Overall thought both tests were poorly made. Lots of terrible, confusing wording, tricky way to ask things, not straightforward, some very nitpicky. thrown off completely that multiple questions appeared to have more than one right answer. Not a “minimal competency” exam, felt like a classic weed out test we have been taking our whole life. They are going to fail many people again is my guess.

Radbio: many just badly worded questions and a good amount of zero xrt related questions, like step1 level trivia. Easy calcs. Many important concepts in “study guide” completely ignored and some things overly emphasized.

Physics: also badly made questions, calc questions on the more complicated end generally, one to two completely stomped me. Many conceptual questions, some terribly worded. Some reasonable questions.

Overall i left the test not feeling well, not like feeling terrible like i failed for sure but very dissappointed with leadership, ABR, our field. This is a complete RUSE and i have definitely some regret to have gone into a field that would put me in this situation after all i have done and sacrificed, busy all day at work and studying after hours in a bad place and having to take not one but TWO nonsensical tests. Shame on them!

I feel sorry for those that had to relieve this misery all over again. I’m sure this year will be just as disappointing.

 

[taserlaser]

What I can say is while there certainly was less 'alphabet soup' in the radbio than last year's, regrettably I didn't have nearly as much time to study as last year and so some concepts were still nitpicky and challenging. Took last two weeks off of June to move, and new health system in July meant I was busy with life stuff. Front loaded the clinical study earlier in the year so will see how that goes. Overall, definitely a meh and very frustrating process.

 

[tjquinn]

I am first time taker so I cannot comment on how it compared to last year. Having said that, the test seemed fair overall. Yes there were questions that were poorly worded or tested seemingly useless factoids, but that is true of all tests I have taken. The majority of questions seemed fair. I felt like every radbio question could be identified from Hall in one way or another. Physics seemed fair too, the calculations on the physics test were no more difficult than Raphex 2019 (I would argue some were easier). Anyway, I did not come out of the test feeling like I rocked it, but I did come out of it feeling like I studied the right stuff (maybe emphasized the wrong things).

Anyway, I suppose in 6 weeks? I will know if my experience reflects a PASS. Glad it is over!

 

[RO28]

Some of the physics questions were quite straight forward which was satisfying, however I really did not like the rounding up/down on some of the calcs. I found that was unsettling.

 

[tjquinn]

Some of the physics questions were quite straight forward which was satisfying, however I really did not like the rounding up/down on some of the calcs. I found that was unsettling.

Agreed but again, if I made a rounding error on one of those questions, I don't think that will be why I failed (please say I didnt fail!)

 

[Radium Dial Painter]

Recent graduate. Did not pass either exam in July 2018.

First off, I'm very appreciative of everyone sharing their exam experiences last year. It has been a very isolating experience to fail in a field of highly-successful people. I've tried to make up for it by working diligently this year, but not sure it paid off. Walked out feeling pretty poorly.

Physics seemed relatively fair (more calculations than anticipated). Rad Bio was really "Cancer Bio with Some Rad Bio." Interesting stuff, just not really useful or applicable for radiation oncologists. Frustrating.

I just wish these exams were more focused on the kind of things that are useful in 2019 to practicing radiation oncologists. Not medical oncologists or PhDs, just plain ol' radiation oncologists. In the mean time, I'll enjoy the next 4-6 weeks until finding out if I'm set up for Lucky Number Three in July 2020.

 

[Hippocrates II]

What are the implications of failing? Do you wind up delaying your ability to graduate/work by a year?

 

[RadOncDoc.]

First time taker. Many questions in rad bio poorly written. Same concepts tested over and over which have nothing to do with radiation therapy. Hopefully passed so do not have to take this crap again

 

[KHE88]

First time taker. Many questions in rad bio poorly written. Same concepts tested over and over which have nothing to do with radiation therapy. Hopefully passed so do not have to take this crap again

No serious implications other than having to take it again. You won't delay orals. You most likely won't have to answer YES to the question of "Have you failed a board examination?" as the hospitals typically consider the certifying exam the board examination. Most employers won't even ask. Academic hospitals might, but only because they know lots of people have been failing. Still shouldn't affect your chances of getting hired. I don't know anyone who didn't get offered a job because they failed radbio

 

[doctordoctor99]

I thought it seemed fair overall. I was a first timer, so based on the reports from last year I think I overstudied a lot of irrelevant minutiae from the study guide that just wasn’t there—if trends stay the same, I’d caution those next year to avoid doing that. The questions that totally stumped me I don’t think I would have gotten from studying harder since the answers weren’t in any of the materials I was using (or to be honest, easily discoverable from a dedicated Google search). If I pass (I know big if), I’d say try to study the basics you know will be on there cold and hopefully that will be fine.

Ironically there were a handful of clinically relevant questions that I had absolutely no idea how to answer since I was too busy studying other things.

 

[thompa]

First time taking these tests as well. I'd concur with the general themes mentioned above. Tests overall seemed fair. After last year's debacle, I was expecting to walk out of there feeling AWFUL...and I didn't. Taking that as a positive sign, but we'll see in 4 - 6 weeks!

For Rad Bio, I also aggressively overstudied pathway minutiae. It helped me rule out some wrong answers on a handful of questions, and maybe netted me an extra 3 or 4 questions. But I think most of the pathway questions were in Hall and most of my "beyond Hall" studying was unnecessary. Agree with above that there were probably a couple questions that actually had clinical relevance that I missed due to memorizing trivia, such as the step-by-step phosphorylation sequences of the MAPK pathway. Ugh. Cancer pharm was also reasonably high yield, probably on par with the pathways.

Physics honestly seemed reasonable. I cracked Khan once, to look up total skin electron therapy. Other than that I used Raphex, radoncquestions, and McDermott. And lots and lots of flashcards (same for radbio too). The actual test yesterday didn't feel too much different than the Raphex exams in terms of topics covered / level of difficulty. TG reports were high yield, so for future lurkers reading this thread, I'd recommend knowing those recommendations pretty solidly.

As for the poor quality of question writing, dunno what to say. It's simply not the same level of professional question development that we got from tests like the Step exams or the MCAT. Some of them were poorly written/vague/open to multiple interpretations, some of the rounding for answers was questionably aggressive, and it's clear that not every question was written by someone with idiomatic command of the English language. There's definitely still a lot of work needed to improve the professional quality of the question writing and much clearer expectations for what we're getting tested on. This whole process was unnecessarily stressful.

Here's hoping for good news in a few weeks...

 

[evilbooyaa]

First time taking these tests as well. I'd concur with the general themes mentioned above. Tests overall seemed fair. After last year's debacle, I was expecting to walk out of there feeling AWFUL...and I didn't. Taking that as a positive sign, but we'll see in 4 - 6 weeks!

For Rad Bio, I also aggressively overstudied pathway minutiae. It helped me rule out some wrong answers on a handful of questions, and maybe netted me an extra 3 or 4 questions. But I think most of the pathway questions were in Hall and most of my "beyond Hall" studying was unnecessary. Agree with above that there were probably a couple questions that actually had clinical relevance that I missed due to memorizing trivia, such as the step-by-step phosphorylation sequences of the MAPK pathway. Ugh. Cancer pharm was also reasonably high yield, probably on par with the pathways.

Physics honestly seemed reasonable. I cracked Khan once, to look up total skin electron therapy. Other than that I used Raphex, radoncquestions, and McDermott. And lots and lots of flashcards (same for radbio too). The actual test yesterday didn't feel too much different than the Raphex exams in terms of topics covered / level of difficulty. TG reports were high yield, so for future lurkers reading this thread, I'd recommend knowing those recommendations pretty solidly.

As for the poor quality of question writing, dunno what to say. It's simply not the same level of professional question development that we got from tests like the Step exams or the MCAT. Some of them were poorly written/vague/open to multiple interpretations, some of the rounding for answers was questionably aggressive, and it's clear that not every question was written by someone with idiomatic command of the English language. There's definitely still a lot of work needed to improve the professional quality of the question writing and much clearer expectations for what we're getting tested on. This whole process was unnecessarily stressful.

Here's hoping for good news in a few weeks...

Completely agree.

"We recommend a language review prior to re-submission of this paper.... er wait, board exam. "

 

[evilbooyaa]

Please fill out the surveymonkey link about the board exam so the ABR can see the feedback of the exam!

 

[RadOncDoc.]

Anyone else hesitant to fill out survey before scores are released?

 

[evilbooyaa]

Anyone else hesitant to fill out survey before scores are released?

Welp, didn't think about that. Probably just paranoia, but I filled out mine. I did check though and the survey links are e-mail specific. Hopefully my lukewarm review of the exams doesn't motivate them to fail me.

 

[Tumba]

Having gotten crushed last year by an unfair random rad bio exam, I feel like the test this year was much more fair. I can remember many questions straight out of the study guide. They definitely made us waste a lot of time memorizing pathway minutiae this year; but who could blame us when we saw what was on the test last year. Overall i think it was difficult but definitely 100x more fair compared to last year.

 

[Ray D. Ayshun]

Having gotten crushed last year by an unfair random rad bio exam, I feel like the test this year was much more fair. I can remember many questions straight out of the study guide. They definitely made us waste a lot of time memorizing pathway minutiae this year; but who could blame us when we saw what was on the test last year. Overall i think it was difficult but definitely 100x more fair compared to last year.

It's a thin line between easier to pass and fair, then. In my estimation, the absolute lack of relevance to the clinic makes it as unfair as having us weave a basket.

 

[thecarbonionangle]

Biggest issue with these exams is that they do not measure “minimal competence”. It is just a continuation of the nonsensical weed out cycles we have been experiencing since we were sperm. It does not matter if you knew enough to pass, it does not make it a “fair” exam because it is NOT doing what it is supposed to do. Fact is the exams were very poorly written, agree that it read almost like a foreigner wrote them and tested a big amount of random trivia, even if i happened to know it or guessed correctly, you walk out feeling cheated that you’re paying the ABR for such a poor exam. I don’t think this is an ARRO thing despite good intentions. There is only so much a group of residents can do in such a small field filled with petty vindictive personalities. This is already bigger than that. My conclusion we have to dump the ABR and proceed to have an alternative pathway away from this nonsense.

 

[radbioistheworst]

Can’t help but notice how many people are saying “radbio was fair” followed by “I studied so hard and so long and wasted time on minutiae. Hope I pass!” There’s a disconnect there - anyone who studied hard should have walked out of there KNOWING they passed if it were really a “fair”minimal competency exam. How many of you can say that? I too think it was a considerable improvement from last year but you still have 5-10 questions from left field and another 5-10 poorly written ones with multiple plausible answers which doesn’t seem like a lot but on a 100 question exam there is a minimal margin of error. The exam was better than last year but I won’t judge “fairness” until I know what the cut score is.

 

[thecarbonionangle]

Even if the pass rate is 95 percent, what are we really measuring? We have tests where smart people with strong work ethic for all their life and now, are walking out saying wtf was that? By having a massive curve and passing a bunch of people because the exam was so poor, you are not doing your job, to measure minimal competency. To go back to business because they passed most people would be to miss the big picture!! Some people may stop caring because well they passed but this has to change for our field’s sake

 

[ramsesthenice]

For everyone saying we need to dump the ABR for something else, keep in mind how the results of this years exams will affect that. It’s not fun studying for an irrelevant exam and feeling like a dried up turd when you walk out, but if pass rates go back to historical normal, what will be the catalyst for change? Most of you will move on with your lives like the rest of us and forget about it. A big part of medicine (and business, law, etc) has always been being able to smile while being asked to eat crap and ask for a second helping. Let’s see how this plays out. I still think they just wanted to wave around their big stick last year so we would all remember they are “important” rather than establishing a new normal. Still hopeful that is the case but time will tell.

 

[deleted774703]

What did ppl do to study for rad bio?

For physics is it best to just use Raphex over and over? Or did you also read book?

Thx so much!

 

[tjquinn]

What did ppl do to study for rad bio?

For physics is it best to just use Raphex over and over? Or did you also read book?

Thx so much!

I suspect everyone did a little bit of everything.

RadBio: ASTRO practice exams (I think I did the most recent 4), RABEX 2019, RadOnc Questions, review of prior radbio inservice questions and Hall/Joiner

Physics: RAPHEX, RadOnc Questions, Physics Mini-review (Dr. McDermott did a trial for some programs in Michigan), review of prior physics inservice questions and The Physics & Technology of Radiation Therapy. I reference Khan for a couple of things but essentially used Dr. McDermott's text. I briefly/casually reviewed the major TG reports.

I did not read any book cover-to-cover but spent my time doing questions. I had already read Hall and McDermott prior to this year so I flipped through them and reviewed subjects as I was getting things wrong from the practice questions.

Full disclosure, no idea if I passed.

 

[deleted774703]

I suspect everyone did a little bit of everything.

RadBio: ASTRO practice exams (I think I did the most recent 4), RABEX 2019, RadOnc Questions, review of prior radbio inservice questions and Hall/Joiner

Physics: RAPHEX, RadOnc Questions, Physics Mini-review (Dr. McDermott did a trial for some programs in Michigan), review of prior physics inservice questions and The Physics & Technology of Radiation Therapy. I reference Khan for a couple of things but essentially used Dr. McDermott's text. I briefly/casually reviewed the major TG reports.

I did not read any book cover-to-cover but spent my time doing questions. I had already read Hall and McDermott prior to this year so I flipped through them and reviewed subjects as I was getting things wrong from the practice questions.

Full disclosure, no idea if I passed.

Thank you very much! I’m about to start studying and this was good advice!

Hope you hear good news this cycle!

 

[evilbooyaa]

What did ppl do to study for rad bio?

For physics is it best to just use Raphex over and over? Or did you also read book?

Thx so much!

Think you'll have a better idea once people get scores back. I have no idea if I passed or not so my study plan is not all that useful.

 

[evilbooyaa]

Thank you very much! I’m about to start studying and this was good advice!

Hope you hear good news this cycle!

If you're studying for 2020, I personally think you're still starting very very (like way too) early, especially if you're a first time test taker. Just saying. The exam is mostly about cramming and vomiting information followed by immediate forgetting. At least IMO.

 

[deleted774703]

If you're studying for 2020, I personally think you're still starting very very (like way too) early, especially if you're a first time test taker. Just saying. The exam is mostly about cramming and vomiting information followed by immediate forgetting. At least IMO.

Thanks for the advice! You're probably right, but I literally blew off rad bio/physics for 1st 2 years. Just wanted to start making a gameplan for this year. Hoping to only take it once!

Good luck on your exam scores!

 

[evilbooyaa]

Thanks for the advice! You're probably right, but I literally blew off rad bio/physics for 1st 2 years. Just wanted to start making a gameplan for this year. Hoping to only take it once!

Good luck on your exam scores!

I also blew off rad bio/physics for 2 years. I'll report back in a few weeks if I passed or not to help guide your decisions.

 

[TDDro]

If you have time now, study for competence in Rad Bio (note: the exam will *not* test competence) by reading Joiner. That will help you so that come spring when you're studying for the test, you'll have a framework for the trivia instead of trying to understand and memorize trivia at the same time.

Likewise with physics, but physics was significantly less trivia (and use McDermott).

 

[taserlaser]

Looks like the ABR did it again - this time to the radiologists. 4 weeks out from the rad onc exams and still not a peep.

 

[scarbrtj]

Looks like the ABR did it again - this time to the radiologists. 4 weeks out from the rad onc exams and still not a peep.

ABR: "What's the problem? There's no trend here."*
*technically correct

 

[deleted941485]

Looks like the ABR did it again - this time to the radiologists. 4 weeks out from the rad onc exams and still not a peep.

Yeah...definitely no guarantee they won’t pull that crap again this year. It has been a couple of weeks now.

Also if anyone had the bright idea of retraining in another field the first question a PD would ask is did you pass your boards. I don’t think they would be jazzed to find out you didn’t and I don’t think they want to hear the whole song and dance about the ABR being unfair either.

 

[evilbooyaa]

Looks like the ABR did it again - this time to the radiologists. 4 weeks out from the rad onc exams and still not a peep.

Scary. And that's a call out for a 15% failure rate. I hope ABR doesn't double down on last year's ~25% failure rate (per exam)

 

[xrthopeful]

scores came out six weeks after boards on a Friday last year.

It's five weeks as of today, will probably come out next week. Would guess next Friday

 

[thecarbonionangle]

Looks like the ABR did it again - this time to the radiologists. 4 weeks out from the rad onc exams and still not a peep.

this is potentially a very bad sign for rad onc, once again. Very faint rumors of high failure rates once again are starting, probably unsubstantiated at this point unless "leakers" but probably just reflective of the level of unreasonable anxiety that people are experiencing.

I've had multiple potential employers ask me over the phone how boards went, so I already see it as a sign it may become an issue for people who fail, despite the re-assurances from people who failed and secured a job last year that It was not an issue.

 

[scarbrtj]

this is potentially a very bad sign for rad onc, once again. Very faint rumors of high failure rates once again are starting, probably unsubstantiated at this point unless "leakers" but probably just reflective of the level of unreasonable anxiety that people are experiencing.

I've had multiple potential employers ask me over the phone how boards went, so I already see it as a sign it may become an issue for people who fail, despite the re-assurances from people who failed and secured a job last year that It was not an issue.

Scene from rad onc residencies across America if the "leaker" is correct...

 

[thecarbonionangle]

Scene from rad onc residencies across America if the "leaker" is correct...

Many people are saying it. what is happening at the ABR is VERY SAD. "leakers", very baaaaad.

 

[randomname2018]

Too early to say much of anything at this point. Best to wait until scores are released.

 

[taserlaser]

MyABR has scheduled maintenance tomorrow. So won’t be earlier than Friday I expect

 

[deleted605854]

Last year the scores came out 6 weeks post exam on a Friday at around 3pm EST. Today marks 6 weeks post exam and still no scores. Maybe the ABR uses Mountain standard Time? 2 hours and 15 minutes and the ABR will miss their own deadline.

 

[taserlaser]

I saw someone on twitter said their chief called ABR. Next week.

 

[bob1988]

Called them today too and they said in the next 1-2 weeks. Their new range per the person I talked to is 6-8 weeks. She said the website and info we were given needs to be updated. Shrug

 

[scarbrtj]

Last year the scores came out 6 weeks post exam on a Friday at around 3pm EST. Today marks 6 weeks post exam and still no scores. Maybe the ABR uses Mountain standard Time? 2 hours and 15 minutes and the ABR will miss their own deadline.

Picturing a statistician or two somewhere furiously massaging test result data...

 

[radbioistheworst]

This is good news you guys they’re trying to figure how to turn another 60% pass rate to 75