evilbooyaa

Staff member
Moderator
7+ Year Member
Oct 10, 2011
5,831
4,926
Status
Resident [Any Field]
Ralph protecting his UChicago lack of good brachy experience?

I'm glad that everything that has been said on SDN for the past 2 years is now being said in the twittersphere, even if it is by senior residents.
 

PhotonBomb

5+ Year Member
Mar 23, 2014
420
412
Status
Medical Student
Ralph protecting his UChicago lack of good brachy experience?

I'm glad that everything that has been said on SDN for the past 2 years is now being said in the twittersphere, even if it is by senior residents.
UChicago does tons of GYN brachy and they do LDR prostate I believe last I heard. Don’t think that’s an issue.

for me I don't have a strong opinion on brachy numbers specifically I think all numbers need to go up to raise the barrier of entry for new programs though
 
Last edited:
About the Ads

radoncdoc16

2+ Year Member
Jun 1, 2016
220
364
Status
Resident [Any Field]
Ralph protecting his UChicago lack of good brachy experience?

I'm glad that everything that has been said on SDN for the past 2 years is now being said in the twittersphere, even if it is by senior residents.
yeah I agree. I think it’s very encouraging bc it’s further proof of the good influence SDN has in not creating just sheep

Too many residents and med students are sheep still though...
 
Apr 29, 2018
6
5
Status
Resident [Any Field]
I can only applaud Mudit Chowdhary for fighting the good fight. Refreshing to see residents being honest and passionate about the field vs constantly being a yes man/woman
 
  • Like
Reactions: RadOncMegatron

PhotonBomb

5+ Year Member
Mar 23, 2014
420
412
Status
Medical Student
Would add in this 2 year era of ARRO leadership who have been bold and relentless on social media
 

radoncdoc16

2+ Year Member
Jun 1, 2016
220
364
Status
Resident [Any Field]
I can only applaud Mudit Chowdhary for fighting the good fight. Refreshing to see residents being honest and passionate about the field vs constantly being a yes man/woman
I think we on SDN all agree with him on closing more programs

Whatever means necessary on my end lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: baculum1

radiation

7+ Year Member
Oct 28, 2010
85
88
Status

"The current United States graduate medical education (GME) radiation oncology curriculum lacks clarity and focus. This is evidenced by the fact that radiation oncology residents and educators are struggling to determine what content they need to study and teach, respectively. Currently available materials from the American Board of Radiology (ABR), Accreditation Committee for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), and American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) provide limited guidance on the content to include in clinical training programs. Residents rely on vague ABR study guides to provide guidance on what to study. However, specialty certifying exams, as summative assessment tools, should be the final step in a holistic curriculum development process, not the driving force of a curriculum. These exams should be developed to assess knowledge gained through participating in a constantly renewed training curriculum. Currently, United States GME radiation oncology curriculum development is a case of the tail wagging the dog with United States radiation oncology residency programs and residents using ABR exams to piece together a curriculum. This commentary discusses two examples of how, without proactive curriculum development, the United States GME radiation oncology curriculum is susceptible to errant changes and then suggests a path forward to ensure a national GME radiation oncology curriculum drives ABR exam content, rather than the other way around."

Nice commentary
 

Haybrant

1K Member
15+ Year Member
Jul 6, 2004
1,820
307
Status

"The current United States graduate medical education (GME) radiation oncology curriculum lacks clarity and focus. This is evidenced by the fact that radiation oncology residents and educators are struggling to determine what content they need to study and teach, respectively. Currently available materials from the American Board of Radiology (ABR), Accreditation Committee for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), and American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) provide limited guidance on the content to include in clinical training programs. Residents rely on vague ABR study guides to provide guidance on what to study. However, specialty certifying exams, as summative assessment tools, should be the final step in a holistic curriculum development process, not the driving force of a curriculum. These exams should be developed to assess knowledge gained through participating in a constantly renewed training curriculum. Currently, United States GME radiation oncology curriculum development is a case of the tail wagging the dog with United States radiation oncology residency programs and residents using ABR exams to piece together a curriculum. This commentary discusses two examples of how, without proactive curriculum development, the United States GME radiation oncology curriculum is susceptible to errant changes and then suggests a path forward to ensure a national GME radiation oncology curriculum drives ABR exam content, rather than the other way around."

Nice commentary

Maybe take out the Paul Wallner/Kachnic ostrich effect and let some young people that know what they are doing lead the change and we’ll see some results. The older generation that got in was a bunch of misfits and rejects let’s not forget
 

RickyScott

2+ Year Member
Oct 4, 2017
810
1,015
Status
Attending Physician
Maybe take out the Paul Wallner/Kachnic ostrich effect and let some young people that know what they are doing lead the change and we’ll see some results. The older generation that got in was a bunch of misfits and rejects let’s not forget
btw, who do you think will be matching into this specialty over the next couple years....
 
  • Haha
Reactions: thecarbonionangle

BobbyHeenan

5+ Year Member
Mar 20, 2013
559
474
Status
Attending Physician
It’s cognitive dissonance on top of maleficence to the field and residents to the benefit of your own department.

The data is clear...no one - not patients and certainly not physicians - need more rad oncs right now...it’s just that your department bottom line and attending “need” them.
 
About the Ads

radiaterMike

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
Feb 11, 2005
415
105
Status
How do you know he doesn’t post ?! True - he doesn’t post under his real name but he could still be here.
 

PhotonBomb

5+ Year Member
Mar 23, 2014
420
412
Status
Medical Student
Hopefully true!


Nice.

With Olivier and Vapiwala in their respective positions, the gravy train for expansion is over. Programs better come correct. CASE WESTERN LMAO. Worthless place!

and 'The Lannisters send their regards' to any departments thinking of OPENING a new residency program in this climate. Probably only whispers of rumors but hopefully smarter heads prevail at places like Willis Knighton Cancer Center, Penn State, East Carolina, who have been mentioned in the past as having interest in opening a program. They will get smacked down so hard they'll be back in the 2D era.
 

radiation

7+ Year Member
Oct 28, 2010
85
88
Status
I'm glad to see there are other optimists out there. Since I'm a glass half-full kind of guy, maybe instead of projected weak candidates, we actually get really motivated med students who want to do rad onc despite the present logistical and financial disincentives. It wouldn't be all that different than somebody who really wants to do something like peds onc, where the pay is way less with probably equal or worse geographic restrictions.
 

RickyScott

2+ Year Member
Oct 4, 2017
810
1,015
Status
Attending Physician
I'm glad to see there are other optimists out there. Since I'm a glass half-full kind of guy, maybe instead of projected weak candidates, we actually get really motivated med students who want to do rad onc despite the present logistical and financial disincentives. It wouldn't be all that different than somebody who really wants to do something like peds onc, where the pay is way less with probably equal or worse geographic restrictions.
Sure, optimism is great, but don’t discount possibility that docs could be unemployed.
 
About the Ads