Stanton/Stinson book vs. Caggiano notes

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

CyberKnife19

Full Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
143
Reaction score
24
Has anybody had the opportunity to compare the Stanton/Stinson book to the Caggiano notes? I am at a program that Mr. Caggiano visits every other year to teach us a crash course in RadOnc physics, so all of the senior residents have a copy of his "notes"(500+ pages, what a misnomer!), which I was able to peruse. However, I have not seen the Stanton/Stinson book as a comparison, so I was wondering if anyone else has been able to compare the two side by side.

Any thoughts? Thanks. 🙂
 
Stanton and Stinson is very readable but probably doesn't go into enough depth the way Caggiano's notes do for board prep. I would use both, and avoid Kahn when trying to prepare for physics boards.
 
I read the green book cover to cover and used Caggiano's questions. No way I could have made it through all of his notes as well. In the end, I focused 90% of my efforts on Raphex ~ we'll see how well that worked out for me, but based on what others have said, this year seems to have been an aberration.
 
Has anybody had the opportunity to compare the Stanton/Stinson book to the Caggiano notes? I am at a program that Mr. Caggiano visits every other year to teach us a crash course in RadOnc physics, so all of the senior residents have a copy of his "notes"(500+ pages, what a misnomer!), which I was able to peruse. However, I have not seen the Stanton/Stinson book as a comparison, so I was wondering if anyone else has been able to compare the two side by side.

Any thoughts? Thanks. 🙂

There is a roughly 60-70 page summary of Khan that I know circulates among residents that is absolutely golden for the physics portion of the ABR. I would highly recommend getting a copy of that from somebody. Those notes + old Raphex exams will more than prepare you for the physics section. The only drawback to the notes is that they are a little dated (late 90s I believe), so they do not include IMRT, image guidance, etc. but even without those sections, they are still the best resoure I have come across for the exam.
 
Thanks for the advice above, it is greatly appreciated. 🙂

Does anybody else have any thoughts or advice? Thanks.
 
Top