Luke Nicholls1,2, Ben Bravery3, Revadhi Chelvarajah4, Kate Shi5, Minh Thi Tieu6,7, Sandra Turner8,9, Apsara Windsor6,9,10. 1. Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 2. School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 3. School of Medicine, University of Notre Dame Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 4. Liverpool Cancer Therapy Centre, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 5. School of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 6. University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia. 7. Radiation Oncology Department, Calvary Mater Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia. 8. Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 9. Faculty of Radiation Oncology, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 10. Central Coast Cancer Centre, Gosford, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Radiation therapy is a core component of curative and palliative cancer treatment; however, its indications and benefits remain poorly understood across the medical profession. METHODS: An electronic survey focussing on curriculum content, teaching and assessment in radiation oncology and plans for curriculum change was developed. The Faculty of Radiation Oncology, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiology (RANZCR) distributed the survey to all 24 Australian and New Zealand medical schools. The survey was conducted from November 2017 to January 2018 following ethics approval. RESULTS: Sixteen of the 24 (67%) medical Faculties in Australia and New Zealand responded. Ninety-four percent of Faculties had no formal radiation oncology curriculum. Most Faculties (87%) dedicated <15% of the total medical course to oncology, of which the majority (63%) dedicated <10% to radiation oncology. At least 50% of Faculties did not offer formal radiation oncology teaching to all students. When offered, students' exposure to radiation oncology was often <5 days over the entire course (44%). The majority of medical schools (73%) are planning curriculum changes in the next 5 years; however, most have no intention of changing radiation oncology teaching. CONCLUSION: Radiation oncology continues to be underrepresented in medical curricula throughout Australia and New Zealand with no plans for improvement by Faculties. This study supports the need for formal advocacy for improving radiation oncology education in medical schools and will form the basis of new national recommendations for radiation oncology curriculum development.
INTRODUCTION: Radiation therapy is a core component of curative and palliative cancer treatment; however, its indications and benefits remain poorly understood across the medical profession. METHODS: An electronic survey focussing on curriculum content, teaching and assessment in radiation oncology and plans for curriculum change was developed. The Faculty of Radiation Oncology, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiology (RANZCR) distributed the survey to all 24 Australian and New Zealand medical schools. The survey was conducted from November 2017 to January 2018 following ethics approval. RESULTS: Sixteen of the 24 (67%) medical Faculties in Australia and New Zealand responded. Ninety-four percent of Faculties had no formal radiation oncology curriculum. Most Faculties (87%) dedicated <15% of the total medical course to oncology, of which the majority (63%) dedicated <10% to radiation oncology. At least 50% of Faculties did not offer formal radiation oncology teaching to all students. When offered, students' exposure to radiation oncology was often <5 days over the entire course (44%). The majority of medical schools (73%) are planning curriculum changes in the next 5 years; however, most have no intention of changing radiation oncology teaching. CONCLUSION: Radiation oncology continues to be underrepresented in medical curricula throughout Australia and New Zealand with no plans for improvement by Faculties. This study supports the need for formal advocacy for improving radiation oncology education in medical schools and will form the basis of new national recommendations for radiation oncology curriculum development.