N Thiruthaneeswaran1, S Turner2, C Milross2, K Gogna2. 1. Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia. Electronic address: nilujat@ausdoctors.net. 2. Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiology, Faculty of Radiation Oncology, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
AIM: Since 2005, radiation oncology trainees in Australia and New Zealand have had to undertake a piece of original research during training, and submit a manuscript, as first author, for senior peer-review. Satisfactory completion of this requirement is one component of eligibility to sit the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists Fellowship examinations. The purpose of this study was to examine the value of this curriculum requirement, including the publication rates and potential barriers to trainee research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online survey was sent to 116 radiation oncologists/trainees who trained since the mandatory research requirement was introduced (2005-2011). Questions concerned research topics, publications, subsequent research activity, perceptions on barriers to research and aids to conducting research during training. A web-based search of PubMed by author name was carried out to complete and verify publication statistics. RESULTS: In total, 108 (93.1%) of the 116 trainees across 20 centres who submitted their research papers to the Radiation Oncology Faculty Research Committee were successful in meeting the required standard first time. Half of these trainees ultimately published their paper in a peer-reviewed journal. Of trainees responding to the survey, 62% presented their research at a scientific meeting. Most of the studies were either retrospective (62.3%) or dosimetry/physics projects (10.1%). The main problems encountered in conducting projects were competing clinical commitments and lack of dedicated research time. Notably, long ethics approval processes, lack of supervision and statistical support for projects were not considered barriers. CONCLUSION: This mandatory research requirement ensures trainees initiate and complete at least one project during their training. Since the introduction of this curriculum component, half of the research projects have resulted in publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Increased 'protected time' and training in scientific writing and methods may improve publication rates and quality. This first review of the Australian and New Zealand radiation oncology trainee research requirement highlights areas that need to be addressed to further support and foster a research culture among junior radiation oncologists. Crown
AIM: Since 2005, radiation oncology trainees in Australia and New Zealand have had to undertake a piece of original research during training, and submit a manuscript, as first author, for senior peer-review. Satisfactory completion of this requirement is one component of eligibility to sit the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists Fellowship examinations. The purpose of this study was to examine the value of this curriculum requirement, including the publication rates and potential barriers to trainee research. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online survey was sent to 116 radiation oncologists/trainees who trained since the mandatory research requirement was introduced (2005-2011). Questions concerned research topics, publications, subsequent research activity, perceptions on barriers to research and aids to conducting research during training. A web-based search of PubMed by author name was carried out to complete and verify publication statistics. RESULTS: In total, 108 (93.1%) of the 116 trainees across 20 centres who submitted their research papers to the Radiation Oncology Faculty Research Committee were successful in meeting the required standard first time. Half of these trainees ultimately published their paper in a peer-reviewed journal. Of trainees responding to the survey, 62% presented their research at a scientific meeting. Most of the studies were either retrospective (62.3%) or dosimetry/physics projects (10.1%). The main problems encountered in conducting projects were competing clinical commitments and lack of dedicated research time. Notably, long ethics approval processes, lack of supervision and statistical support for projects were not considered barriers. CONCLUSION: This mandatory research requirement ensures trainees initiate and complete at least one project during their training. Since the introduction of this curriculum component, half of the research projects have resulted in publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Increased 'protected time' and training in scientific writing and methods may improve publication rates and quality. This first review of the Australian and New Zealand radiation oncology trainee research requirement highlights areas that need to be addressed to further support and foster a research culture among junior radiation oncologists. Crown