Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/29006
Title: Radiation oncology peer review in Australia and New Zealand.
Austin Authors: Chin, Stephen;Or, Michelle;Ong, Wee Loon ;Millar, Jeremy;Chilkuri, Madhavi;Vinod, Shalini
Affiliation: Olivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness and Research Centre
University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia..
La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia..
Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre Westmead, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia..
Alfred Health Radiation Oncology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia..
Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia..
Townsville University Hospital, Townsville, Queensland, Australia..
Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia..
South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, & Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia..
Issue Date: Mar-2022
Publication information: Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology 2022; 66(2): 258-266
Abstract: Peer review is a part of high quality care within radiation oncology, designed to achieve the best outcomes for patients. We discuss the importance of and evidence for peer review in clinical practice. The Royal Australia and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) has evolved a Peer Review Assessment Tool (PRAT) since 1999. We report the results of a RANZCR faculty survey conducted in radiation oncology facilities across Australia and New Zealand to guide the 2019 PRAT revision process, and discuss the development and implementation of the 2019 PRAT. Peer-review processes are now mandated as a component of Australian and International Quality Standards. Several practical recommendations might address challenges for effective implementation of peer review process in routine clinical practice. This includes prioritising tumour sites and treatment techniques for peer review within the time and resources constraints of each institution, improving resource allocation, ensuring optimal timing and duration for peer review meetings, and adopting multi-centre virtual peer review meeting where necessary.
URI: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/29006
DOI: 10.1111/1754-9485.13360
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7279-0211
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1549-3541
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6657-7193
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8202-8602
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0128-1591
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8075-6219
Journal: Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology
PubMed URL: 35243786
PubMed URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35243786/
Type: Journal Article
Subjects: feedback
peer review
quality improvement
radiation oncology
radiotherapy
Appears in Collections:Journal articles

Show full item record

Page view(s)

28
checked on Jul 3, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.