S Ilyas1, A Beatie2, G Pettet2, A Kharay2, V Hedayati2, S Hameed2, M A McCleery2, N Papadakos2, B Chari2. 1. Junior Radiologists' Forum, The Royal College of Radiologists, 63 Lincoln's Inn Fieldş London, UK. Electronic address: drshahzadilyas@hotmail.com. 2. Junior Radiologists' Forum, The Royal College of Radiologists, 63 Lincoln's Inn Fieldş London, UK.
Abstract
AIM: To gather information in order to highlight areas within training that could be improved and share ideas of good practice and, in addition, to compare national results with those of local training schemes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A request to participate in the survey was emailed to 1158 radiology trainees across 36 UK training schemes in October 2012. The electronic replies were anonymous. The survey remained active for 6 weeks. The data were collated and analysed by members of the JRF. The survey itself was divided into seven sections, covering a diverse range of topics. RESULTS: Six hundred and four trainees from 36 UK training schemes completed the survey, resulting in a response rate of 52%.
AIM: To gather information in order to highlight areas within training that could be improved and share ideas of good practice and, in addition, to compare national results with those of local training schemes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A request to participate in the survey was emailed to 1158 radiology trainees across 36 UK training schemes in October 2012. The electronic replies were anonymous. The survey remained active for 6 weeks. The data were collated and analysed by members of the JRF. The survey itself was divided into seven sections, covering a diverse range of topics. RESULTS: Six hundred and four trainees from 36 UK training schemes completed the survey, resulting in a response rate of 52%.
Authors: D R Rutgers; F van Raamt; W van Lankeren; C J Ravesloot; A van der Gijp; Th J Ten Cate; J P J van Schaik Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 5.315