What is the viva experience of phase 2 Radiation Oncology examination candidates? Survey and advice for future candidates

Abstract

Introduction: Medical speciality examination is a very stressful event in medical careers. We aimed to determine the subjective experience of Radiation Oncology Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) oral examination candidates. It was hoped the results would provide reassurance and advice for future candidates. Methods: We distributed an anonymous online survey through the RANZCR membership database to Radiation Oncology Trainees and fellows who may have sat their oral examination within the last 3 years.Results: There were 21 responses, yielding a response rate of 21%. Nineteen percent of respondents were moderately or very surprised during their viva and the most frequently noted cause was the demeanour of the examiners. The clinical cases and clinical examination station were rated very fair by over 80% of responders while the planning cases were rated very fair by 57%. During the viva, 33% thought they passed and 71% of these candidates were successful. Forty-three percent felt they were borderline, and all of these respondents passed. Five participants (24%) failed in the first attempt and four described being unable to convey their actual knowledge. Candidates found mock examinations to be the most useful examination preparation activity. The most frequently given advice was to focus on the planning examination. Conclusions: The majority of this select group of candidates indicated that the oral examination cases were very fair. Candidates rated the planning exam as least fair, indicating this may be the area that would benefit most from better preparation.

Comment on: Are we training the next generation of proficient Radiation Oncologists, or just better examination candidates?

“…1 We wish to vouch and acknowledge the comments made by Turner et al with reference to the Kleiven et al's survey. 1,2 Our team agrees with points made by the authors, but in the context of post graduate training programmes in developing countries, the issue of nurturing a patient centred carer, proficient Radiation Oncologist rather than just an examination candidate becomes more pertinent and detrimental. In the absence of robust regulatory systems pertaining to continuing medical education (CME) and practice privilege documentation after passing the post graduate exit exam, we strongly recommend peer-reviewed, site-specialized Radiation Oncology practice.…”

Are we training the next generation of proficient radiation oncologists, or just better examination candidates?

“…Kleivan et al 1 acknowledge the limitations of their study including the low survey response rate, the time elapsed since the exam process, and the subjectivity of exam 'fairness' and how this may be influenced by exam outcome. Nonetheless, this does not remove the basic premise that preparedness for the exam process, as distinct from having the actual content knowledge, does influence performance.…”

“…The article by Kleiven et al . entitled ‘What is the viva experience of Phase 2 Radiation Oncology examination candidates?…”

“…Kleivan et al . acknowledge the limitations of their study including the low survey response rate, the time elapsed since the exam process, and the subjectivity of exam ‘fairness’ and how this may be influenced by exam outcome.…”

“…The article by Kleiven et al 1 entitled 'What is the viva experience of Phase 2 Radiation Oncology examination candidates? Survey and advice for future candidates', not only provides important insights for those involved with examination setting and delivery but also prompts interesting questions around some complex educational dilemmas.…”