1. SMART Update S tatistical M ethods, E vidence A ppraisal & Research for Trainees

2. Overview of the SMART Plan 2 Expose trainees to a broader scope of clinically relevant stats and research in a way that gives choice of topics and learning style. Provide a yearly workshop that covers the basics and can act as the backbone for their learning. Link learning opportunities with research groups / scientific meetings Mandate submission of research projects to a journal and maximise network support structures. −Raising the bar. Improve profile and quality of the research project −Ensure trainees experience the entire process −Carrot & stick for supervisors - name attached to “real” submission −Network Research Mentors Satisfy curriculum requirements & foster interest in research.

3. Background – Why the change? 3 Research project: From 2005 - “publishable quality” →Quality highly variable. →Some not prepared to an appropriate standard for journal submission →Problems with supervision and guidance at some centres. →Small pool of reviewers recruited by research committee. Uncertainty over level of “passable quality” →93% deemed to be of “publishable quality” on first submission →Only ~60% of projects went on to get published. →Trainees not always exposed to the actual process of a formal manuscript submission, peer review, revisions etc. N. Thiruthaneeswaran et al. / Clinical Oncology 26 (2014) 162e173

4. Background 4

5. 5 N. Thiruthaneeswaran et al. / Clinical Oncology 26 (2014) 162e173

6. Background 6 N. Thiruthaneeswaran et al. / Clinical Oncology 26 (2014) 162e173

7. Background 7 Old statistics assignment not a great learning tool →Isolated “hurdle” to be jumped in the middle of training →Unsustainable - heavily reliant on time & goodwill of a few →Little scope for feedback / interaction →Did not allow trainee to pursue own areas of interest to fulfill requirement →Did not expose trainee to broader scope of oncology stats/research →Wasn’t geared to fostering an interest in research

8. SMART Points 8 Trainees can accrue SMART points by completing a variety of activities related to statistical concepts, critical appraisal, trial design. Designed to be flexible, self-directed and individualised. Allow trainees choice in topics for learning in stats and critical appraisal Can tailor learning experience to their own interests / circumstances. Linked to learning outcomes in the new curriculum within the scholar, collaborator & communicator CanMEDs roles

9. SMART Points Accrual 9 Trainees are required to attain a minimum of 20 SMART points Can start as soon as they enter the training program Must document their activities undertaken, signed off by supervisor and submitted to College via TIMS (SMART report template &/or certificate of completion) All 20 points (or more) must be verified as having been attained by the College before an application can be made to sit the Phase 2 examinations. As always we strongly recommend this is completed well before the trainee plans to apply to sit for phase 2 exam.

10. SMART Points Accrual Pack Includes the following documents – 1.SMART Points Activity Guide; provides suggested activities that link to particular learning outcomes in the curriculum. This is not an exhaustive list. If a trainee or DoT wishes to undertake a diff activity, not on the current list, they should contact the Education Officer in writing. 2.SMART Resources List; which includes books, journals, workshops, websites, courses & other activities 3.SMART Reporting Template; A report or other evidence must be completed by the trainees & signed by a Supervisor (DoT or other suitable senior colleague) 10

11. 11 SMART Points Activity Guide

12. TROG/FRO SMART Workshop 12 Two one-day modules covering core concepts.Modules alternated each year and held in conjunction with TROG ASM Interactive with opportunities to talk with leading researchers and biostatisticians. Filmed, recorded, edited down and available on the LMS. Trainees encouraged to attend the rest of the ASM to listen to and engage with investigators, colleagues etc. Attendance at the initial workshop is awarded 10 points, with attendance at the second workshop awarded 5 points

13. Research Project Aims to Foster an interest in research amongst trainees Apply an understanding of research methodology Ensure participation in research as integral to Radiation Oncology training and subsequent specialist practice Give all trainees the experience of journal submission Encourage trainees to contribute to the Oncology literature in their future careers 13

14. Research Project A Research Mentor/Supervisor should be identified for each project and must be an author on the submitted manuscript. Research Mentor / Supervisors responsible for ensuring that research topics chosen are suitable and achievable. Advice may be obtained from the Faculty Research Committee and/or Network Research Mentors if there is uncertainty about the suitability of the research topic. Trainees are encouraged to refer to the SMART Resource List for recommended resources that may help them with their project. The trainee and research mentor/supervisor have joint responsibility in ensuring that the work is conducted and presented in a scientifically robust manner. 14

15. Research Project To be eligible to sit the phase 2 exam trainees must have their manuscript 1.ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION in a suitable Oncology-related peer review journal OR 2.ACCEPTED THROUGH TO THE PEER-REVIEW PROCESS if submitted to JMIRO, Clinical Oncology, IJROBP or Practical Oncology. - College has discussed editorial process with these journals - Trainee will receive notification of progress to peer review within 3wks - Safer bet for trainee if they haven’t completed project well in advance Trainee must be the first author and have primary responsibility for the research conducted. Trainees will be required to provide proof of acceptance to peer review before applying to sit the Phase 2 examinations 15

16. Research Project Option for JMIRO submissions only If project doesn’t get accepted to peer review stage Trainee notifies College Education Officer Senior member of JMIRO editorial board will provide feedback to outline deficiencies with the manuscript/project and give guidance regarding improvements required. The trainee then submits a report (“reflective summary”) to the College outlining how the project and manuscript could be improved and what the research experience has taught them. 16

17. SMART Update Questions ?