Evidence mapPaperPMID 42484645Full record

ArticleStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al]2026

DEGRO consensus framework for undergraduate radiation therapy teaching in Germany: a white paper with integrated guidance on artificial intelligence in medical education.

Philipp Linde, Biney Pal Singh, Maria Neu, Johannes Gollrad, Martin Bischoff, Gustavo R Sarria, Annett Linge, Nanna E Wielenberg, Anna-Lena Hillebrecht, Laura Höng and 16 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al], 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

26 authors.

Philipp LindeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Cyberknife and Radiation Therapy, University Hospital of Cologne, Kerpener St 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany. philipp.linde@uk-koeln.de.
Biney Pal SinghDepartment of Radiation Oncology, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany.
Maria NeuDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Faculty of Medicine, University of Augsburg, Stenglinstr. 2, 86156, Augsburg, Germany.
Johannes GollradDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Martin BischoffDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital of Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Marien Hospital Herne, Herne, Germany.
Gustavo R SarriaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Bonn, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Annett LingeDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden Technical University, Dresden, Germany.
Nanna E WielenbergDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Medical Center-University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Anna-Lena HillebrechtDepartment of Prosthetic Dentistry, Center for Dental Medicine, Medical Center-University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Hugstetterstr. 55, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
Laura HöngDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, Giessen-Marburg University Hospital, Giessen, Germany.
Martin LeuDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany.
Jörg Andreas MüllerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Halle, Halle (Saale), Germany.
Lukas Fabian BoehmeDepartment of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Anne Caroline KnöchelmannDepartment of Radiotherapy, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Jan-Niklas BeckerDepartment of Radiotherapy, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Klaus HerfarthDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Sonia DrozdzDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany.
Matthias MäurerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany.
Ina PattiesDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Leipzig, Stephanstraße 9a, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Daniel FleischmannDepartment of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Medizin, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Daniel SchmottermeyerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Alexander FabianDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
Bernd FrerkerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Rostock University Medical Center, 18059, Rostock, Germany.
Sebastian HeßDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Würzburg, Julius-Maximilians-University, Würzburg, Germany.
Michael OertelDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.
Hendrik DapperDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Cyberknife and Radiation Therapy, University Hospital of Cologne, Kerpener St 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeUndergraduate medical education is increasingly competency-based, digital, and interprofessional in accordance with the National Competence-Based Learning Objectives Catalogue for Medicine (Nationaler Kompetenzbasierter Lernzielkatalog Medizin, NKLM). Against this background, a nationally relevant, consensus-based framework for undergraduate radiation therapy education in Germany was developed by an expert panel of faculty representatives, aligned with the competencies expected at the end of the practical year (PJ) and in the final state examination context (M3), and complemented by guidance on the responsible educational use of artificial intelligence (AI).

methodsThe framework was prepared by the German Society of Radiation Oncology (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Radioonkologie, DEGRO) working group "Medical Education" (AG Lehre), including a consolidated master document and 16 teaching portfolios that informed 15 candidate competencies. In a second step, 25 formally delegated representatives from 22 of the 36 university radiation oncology departments in Germany participated in a structured expert consensus process incorporating individual prioritization, small-group refinement, plenary consolidation, predefined voting thresholds, and postworkshop editorial integration.

resultsThe resulting framework comprised four components: (1) nine prioritized core competencies defining a national minimum standard at the PJ/M3 level; (2) implementation bandwidths (minimal, recommended, best practice) anchored in anonymized site-profile data; (3) a staged A/B/C assessment model aligned with the Miller pyramid; and (4) integrated AI guidance defining permitted use cases, nonnegotiable boundaries, AI literacy goals, and a practical educator-facing implementation logic. The tumor board was identified as a particularly suitable integrative teaching format.

conclusionThis white paper presents a nationally coordinated, competency-oriented framework for undergraduate radiation therapy education that combines a stable core with scalable local implementation options. By linking essential competencies, teaching bandwidths, staged assessment, and responsible AI guidance, greater consistency, coherence, and practical implementation of radiation therapy teaching across heterogeneous faculties is facilitated.

Indexed as

Competency-based teachingCurriculumDigital learningInnovative teaching conceptsNational competency-based learning objectives catalogue in medicine

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.