Commentary: Toward safe and high quality care through peer review in radiation oncology: Need for more evidence

Predictors of breast radiotherapy plan modifications: Quality assurance rounds in a large cancer centre

“…In the future, to further optimize time expenditure, we might consider randomly reviewing only a fraction of such low-risk cases, since the probability of modification is so low, although additional data [34], and having our observations corroborated by other groups would be desirable. Hence, this study has demonstrated the feasibility of a peer review QA process for all radically-treated breast cancer cases, and through the prospective collection of QA data, patterns of modification can be identified that could direct future re-structuring for this process.…”

“I sleep better at night:” How peer review of radiation treatment plans indirectly improves quality of care across radiation treatment programs

“…9 Several authors have described the potential of peer review to indirectly improve quality of care in radiotherapy, both at the general practice level 1;10 or within specific institutions. [11][12][13][14][15][16] In addition, surveys of Canadian ROPs have provided quantitative evidence regarding the perceived benefits of peer review.…”

Six-Year Checkup: Narrowing the Scope of Practical Radiation Oncology

“…[6][7][8][9][10] Original articles focusing on patient safety, quality measurement, and quality improvement initiatives are also welcomed, as are reports focusing on treatment planning and delivery (such as imaging, contouring, simulation, and immobilization of organ motion). 11,12 We will also continue to invite authors to send in essays that highlight enriching personal experiences that derive from caring for cancer patients and their families, what we are calling Narrative Oncology. [13][14][15] We are no longer going to consider case reports unless they present a compelling diagnostic, ethical, or management challenge.…”