<link rel="stylesheet" href="styles.f3b1fba60ec7970c.css">

Publication:
Peer review in radiation oncology: where does the Middle East, North Africa, and Türkiye region stand?

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Departments

Item type:Organizational Unit,

School / College / Institute

Item type:Organizational Unit,
SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
Upper Org Unit

Program

KU-Authors

Organization Authors

Co-Authors

Abutaha, Shatha

Mula-Hussain, Layth

ElHaddad, Mostafa

Sami, Sara

Ammar, Khawla

Dahbi, Zineb

Jabbour, Caroline

Abu-Hijlih, Ramiz

Al-Ibraheem, Akram

Abuhijla, Fawzi

Date

Language

Embargo Status

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Alternative Title

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study aims to assess the status of radiation oncology peer review procedures across the Middle East, North Africa, and Türkiye (MENAT) region. METHODS: A cross-sectional electronic survey was conducted among radiotherapy centers in the MENAT region in March 2024. It assessed peer review practices, departmental demographics, perceived importance of peer review, and potential barriers. RESULTS: Data from 177 radiation oncology centers revealed varying peer review implementation across the MENAT region. Egypt had the highest participation (16.4%) among all responders. Most centers (31%) treated 500-1,000 cases annually. The majority (77.4%) implemented peer review, with varying levels between countries and across different centers. Advanced radiotherapy techniques significantly correlated with implementation of peer review (P < .05). Peer review meetings were mostly scheduled on a weekly basis (46%) and organized by radiation oncologists (84.7%). Target volume contouring (89%) and radiotherapy prescription (82%) were frequently peer-reviewed. Respondents with peer review at their institutions significantly valued peer review for education, adherence to guidelines, improving planning protocols, and reducing variation in practice institutions without peer review (P < .05). The most frequently reported barriers to peer review were having a high number of patients (56%) and shortage of time (54%). CONCLUSION: Peer review is essential for improving the quality of practice in radiation oncology. Despite some discrepancies, numerous obstacles, and challenges in implementation, it is instrumental in the improvement of patient care in most centers throughout the region. Raising awareness among radiation oncologists about the importance of peer review is paramount to lead to better outcomes.

Source

Publisher

Lippincott Williams and Wilkins

Subject

Citation

item.page.haspartof

Source

JCO Global Oncology

item.page.ispartofseries

item.page.edition

DOI

10.1200/GO.24.00229

item.page.datauri

item.page.link

Rights

Copyrights Note

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

Related Patent

Related Goal

Item type:Goal, Access status: Open Access ,
03 - Good Health and Well-being
Over the last 15 years, the number of childhood deaths has been cut in half. This proves that it is possible to win the fight against almost every disease. Still, we are spending an astonishing amount of money and resources on treating illnesses that are surprisingly easy to prevent. The new goal for worldwide Good Health promotes healthy lifestyles, preventive measures and modern, efficient healthcare for everyone.
Google Scholar
Scholar'da Ara ↗
7
Görüntülenme
14
İndirme
Altmetric
Dimensions
PlumX Metrikleri
BIP! Indicators