As part of your application for Clinical Radiology ST3, you will be required to complete a self assessment along with submitting supporting evidence to justify your score.
On this page
In this self-assessment, you will be awarded points based on the details you give regarding your achievements and qualifications.
In this self-assessment you will be awarded points based on the details you give regarding your achievements and qualifications. You will be required to select the most appropriate option from a list of statements within each of the eight domains of achievements. All achievements should relate to the field of medicine (in its broadest sense – i.e. not just hospital medicine).
Scoring
The selection of options must be absolutely at your discretion alone. We have attempted to clarify the wording of options below, but under no circumstances can we advise you on which options to select.
Experiences and achievements will not always fit neatly under one option or another. You will need to use your professional judgement to ascertain which of the available options is the most appropriate to the best of your knowledge and belief. For example, where more than one statement matches your achievements, select the highest-level option on the list.
You will be required to add text for each selection to demonstrate why you chose that option.
Submitting and supporting evidence
After the application closing date, applicants will be required to load supporting evidence to justify the self-assessment achievements claimed on the application form.
Only candidates who are longlisted successful will be invited to submit their evidence. We do recommend applicants should finalise and plan to have their documents ready to upload soon after application submission and will be written to soon after the application closing date to confirm the method and upload window for submission of evidence. However, it is advised to prepare documents in advance so this process can be completed quickly.
Interviewers will need to verify your evidence in a short time so please keep the below in mind when organising the evidence, you will upload, as poorly organised/presented documents may mean achievements cannot be verified:
- Only the first four pieces of evidence for each domain will be reviewed
- Only evidence supporting each of the claimed achievements should be uploaded. There is no requirement to upload any additional documents or achievements if they are not directly related to the scoring domain where points are being claimed
- Only sufficient evidence should be provided to justify the scores awarded. Only include enough evidence to demonstrate achievements which justify your selection. For example:
- If you have completed a national presentation, there is no requirement to include evidence for other presentations
- If you have written a book, you do not need to upload the whole book, just sufficient pages so interviewers can verify your achievement
- Evidence of training courses or areas noted in your commitment to specialty section should not be included unless they specifically relate to a scored option
- Applicants must ensure patient-identifiable data is redacted as this may result in the employing trust being notified for failing to do this
- Any documentation not in English must be translated, otherwise credit may not be received for this
- File types and naming – there are steps that should be taken to make it as straightforward as possible for reviewers to check your evidence:
- Clearly name files with the scoring domain name appearing first, followed by a description of the document; e.g. Undergraduate – Degree classification evidence – certificate
- Aim to use standardised file types which can be opened by any user regardless of the software they have available. Whilst it is being confirmed which document types will be accepted, you should aim to convert all files to PDF, JPEG or PNG format
- Ensure each document is contained within a single file, e.g. do not take a photo of each page of a publication and load them as separate files
- Application form: You are required to download and attach a copy of the Self Assessment section of your Oriel application form. This will be reviewed alongside your attached evidence by the assessors as part of the scoring for the Self-Assessment
The user guide details how to download this from Oriel.
If you have any issues with the format of the form once downloaded, please try another browser; latest versions of Chrome, Microsoft Edge and Firefox are recommended.
Please review the below for examples of supportive evidence that could be used to support your score in preparation for this.
Evidence should include candidate’s name, date, and other details as relevant such as name of qualification, name of awarding body, grade, title of presentation or paper, place where presented.
Examples of evidence
Self-assessment supporting evidence
| Category |
Evidence |
|
Category
Postgraduate degrees and qualifications
|
Evidence
Certificate
|
|
Category
Presentations/posters
|
Evidence
Programme – preferably Abstract book Reference (published abstract) Copy of presentation, giving place and date
|
|
Category
Publications
|
Evidence
Paper PubMed citation link PMID number Relevant book pages Copy of written abstract with details of where published
|
|
Category
Teaching Experience
|
Evidence
Copy of teaching programme Copy of reflection Examples of written feedback Workplace Based Assessment (WpBA) Supervisor’s letter confirming contribution
|
|
Category
Training in teaching
|
Evidence
Certificate
|
|
Category
Quality Improvement
|
Evidence
Programme where presented Summary of results Reflection Feedback, if available WpBA Certificate of course attended or qualification Supervisor's letter confirming contribution
|
|
Category
Leadership and Management
|
Evidence
Membership certificate Certificate of achievement Proof of leadership role (for example, letter, email, prize, photograph)
|
|
Category
Radiology reporting statistics
|
Evidence
Anonymised patient data, logbook or anonymised reporting statistics (countersigned by Head of Department)
|
Scores not adjustable after submission
You cannot amend this section after submission should you make a mistake on your application form or gained an achievement after the submission of your application; for example, if you subsequently pass a section of a membership exam, this cannot be added to your score.
Overclaiming
Instances of candidates blatantly or persistently trying to gain an unfair advantage by overclaiming scores for and/or exaggerating their achievements, will be taken extremely seriously. This could lead to an application being deemed not appointable, or, in very serious cases, could be reported as a probity matter to the GMC; however, this is a very rare outcome and only in cases of overt cheating.
Completed achievements only
When you come to submit your application, all information within it must be accurate at the time of submission - any qualifications not yet gained, courses not yet taken, presentations not yet given, etc. should not be included at this point. An achievement gained even on the day after the closing date for applications cannot be counted.
The only exception is publications which have been completely accepted and are 'in press'. However, whilst you cannot select a point-scoring option on the basis of incomplete achievements, you are welcome to mention it in the text box for that section, you will not however gain any additional points.
If you have multiple achievements in a single domain
If you have more than one achievement in an area which only allows you to choose an option for one, for example, qualifications or achievements, you should select the option corresponding to your highest scoring achievement. You can then use the space below to mention your other achievements in the area. However, you will not be rewarded any further points.
If you have an achievement in multiple domains
If you have an achievement which could potentially fit under more than one domain, for example winning a prize for a poster or doing a presentation based on a publication, it is acceptable to claim under both options.
The only exception is that under no circumstances can you claim in the presentation section for a presentation on a quality improvement project as this forms part of the scoring for the quality improvement (QI) section.
Time limit
There is no set number of years within which you need to have completed the achievements listed, however any achievements claimed must have been gained after commencing your medical (or first undergraduate) degree, i.e. achievements from school or before university cannot be claimed.
The Self-assessment domains
Word limitations
There will be a text box for each domain where you will be required to add text to demonstrate why you chose that option. Each section will have a maximum word count, detailed in the table below, however, we advise that you keep your explanations as short as possible to justify the selection.
The panel will have limited time to check application forms and the more succinct you can be about your achievement, the more straightforward it will be for them to review your folder.
Scoring domain word limitations
| Scoring domain |
Maximum word count |
|
Scoring domain
Postgraduate degrees and qualifications
|
Maximum word count
100
|
|
Scoring domain
Presentations/posters
|
Maximum word count
100
|
|
Scoring domain
Publications
|
Maximum word count
100
|
|
Scoring domain
Teaching experience
|
Maximum word count
100
|
|
Scoring domain
Training in teaching
|
Maximum word count
100
|
|
Scoring domain
Quality improvement (QI)
|
Maximum word count
100
|
|
Scoring domain
Leadership and management
|
Maximum word count
100
|
|
Scoring domain
Radiology reporting statistics
|
Maximum word count
100
|
Please find below further explanation for the domains in your self-assessment.
Domain 1: Postgraduate degrees and qualifications
| Options |
Score |
Notes |
|
PhD or DPhil Doctor of Philosophy (can include non-medical related qualifications)
Or,
Fellowship of The Royal College of Radiologists (FRCR) 2B examination
|
6 |
You undertook full-time research involving original work, usually of a least 3 years' duration, and ideally resulting in one or more peer-reviewed publication
You have completed FRCR 2B
|
|
MD Doctor of Medicine - 2-year original research based
Or,
MPhil Master of Philosophy (can include non-medical related qualifications)
|
5 |
The MD Doctor of Medicine means that you undertook full-time research involving original work, usually of at least 2-years' duration, and ideally resulting in one or more peer-reviewed publication |
|
Full Membership of the Royal Colleges of Physicians (MRCP)
Or,
Membership of The Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS)
Or,
FRCR 2A examination
|
4 |
Not applicable |
| Single-year (or equivalent) postgraduate course, for example, Master of Science (MSc), Master of Research (MRes) (can include non-medical related qualifications) |
3 |
This must be a specific course that usually lasts for 3 university terms and is 8 months' or more duration. It must not be claimed for upgrading a bachelor’s degree without further study as is offered in some universities
Explain in your Oriel application form, the duration of the course and the whole time equivalent and the content of the course.
If a dissertation was part of the course, what percentage of the overall mark did it contribute |
|
MD Doctor of Medicine - dissertation only
Or,
Part 1 of MRCP and MRCS
|
2 |
You undertook a dissertation (that is, writing about a subject not using your own original research) with a relatively small amount of research content, and usually of 1 year or less in duration |
| Other relevant postgraduate diploma or postgraduate certificate typically lasting between 1 and 10 months (whole-time equivalent) |
1 |
This option is for relevant postgraduate courses/modules (for example, example diploma of tropical medicine and hygiene). It is not permissible to claim points for partially completed qualifications (for example, 1 year of a 3-year degree) |
| None of the above |
0 |
Not applicable |
Domain 2: Presentation/Posters
| Option |
Score |
Notes |
|
I have given a radiology related oral presentation
Or,
Shown a radiology related poster at a national or international medical meeting
|
10 |
National means that participation is routinely extended to, and accepted by, anyone in the country; as implied, international means participation extends beyond this |
| I have given an oral presentation at a national or international medical meeting |
9 |
National means that participation is routinely extended to, and accepted by, anyone in the country; as implied, international means participation extends beyond this |
| I have shown more than one poster at national or international medical meetings |
8 |
National means that participation is routinely extended to, and accepted by, anyone in the country; as implied, international means participation extends beyond this |
| I have given a radiology related oral presentation or shown a radiology related poster at a regional medical meeting |
7 |
Regional means that participation is confined to, for example, a county, medical training region, health authority, or a recognised cluster of hospitals, extending beyond a city
|
|
I have shown one poster at a national or international medical meeting
Or,
I have given an oral presentation at a regional medical meeting
|
6 |
National means that participation is routinely extended to, and accepted by, anyone in the country; as implied, international means participation extends beyond this
Regional means that participation is confined to, for example, a county, medical training region, health authority, or a recognised cluster of hospitals extending beyond a city
|
|
I have shown one or more posters at a regional medical meeting(s)
Or,
I have contributed to a poster presented nationally or internationally, but was not the first author
|
5 |
Regional means that participation is confined to, for example, a county, medical training region, health authority, or a recognised cluster of hospitals extending beyond a city
National means that participation is routinely extended to, and accepted by, anyone in the country; as implied, international means participation extends beyond this
|
|
I have given an oral presentation, or shown one of more posters at a local medical meeting(s)
Or,
I was a significant contributor to an oral presentation or poster at a national or international medical meeting, which I did not personally present or show
Or,
I have contributed to a poster presented regionally but was not the first author
|
4 |
Local usually means participation is confined to a local hospital or university setting
Regional and local meetings do not qualify here
Regional means that participation is confined to, for example, a county, medical training region, health authority, or a recognised cluster of hospitals, extending beyond a city
|
| None of the above |
0 |
Not applicable |
Please note - you must not, in any circumstances, include any presentations/posters relating to audit or quality improvement projects here - use the specific 'quality improvement' section (see QI tab for further details). If you have done multiple QI projects, you cannot claim points for QI-related presentations here even if you did not claim points for that project in the QI section. Additional QI projects can be mentioned without claiming points in the free-entry text box in that section.
Presentation
'Presentations' referred to here are oral presentations, with or without slides, in front of an audience of healthcare professionals.
These can be of anything related to medicine, typically a case or case series, research or other topic. It would normally be expected to include a question and answer session.
Posters
The options also allow for posters, if a poster is shown without an accompanying oral presentation, you can still claim points in line with the relevant statement below.
'Shown' should be considered to mean a significant role in the production and content of the poster and attendance at any question and answer poster session during the conference/meeting at which it is displayed.
I did not personally present or show a poster
If you were a significant contributor to a presentation but did not personally present it, you can only claim points if this was in a national or international medical meeting choosing the relevant option below.
In the case of a poster, if you did not 'show' the poster but played a significant role in the production and content, as with presentations, you can only claim points where this was for a national or international medical meeting.
Medical meeting
Typically this will be an audience of doctors and/or other healthcare professionals attending away from their normal place of work for which attendees will be undertaking continuing professional development.
The exception to this is the option for a local meeting where the audience is predominantly internal to that workplace.
Please note - you must not, in any circumstances, include any presentations/posters relating to audit or quality improvement projects here - use the specific 'quality improvement' section (see QI tab for further details). If you have done multiple QI projects, you cannot claim points for QI-related presentations here even if you did not claim points for that project in the QI section. Additional QI projects can be mentioned without claiming points in the free-entry text box in that section.
Domain 3: Publications
| Option |
Score |
Notes |
|
I am first author, or joint-first author, of one or more PubMed-cited original research publications (or in press) related to radiology
|
10 |
Not applicable |
|
I am first author, or joint-first author, of 2 or more PubMed-cited original research publications (or in press)
|
9 |
For this option, you need to be first or joint-first author in all of the publications to which you refer |
| I am first author, or joint-first author, of one PubMed-cited original research publication (or in press) |
8 |
Not applicable |
|
I am the co-author of 2 or more PubMed-cited original research publication (or in press)
Or,
I am the co-author of 2 or more PubMed-cited original research publication (or in press) related to radiology
|
7 |
This option can be interpreted as 'I am at least co-author in more than one...’
|
| I am co-author of one Pub-Med cited original research publication (or in press) |
6 |
Not applicable |
| I am first author, joint-first author, or co-author of more than one PubMed-cited other publication (or in press) such as editorials, reviews, case reports or letters |
5 |
Not applicable |
|
I am first author, joint-first author, or co-author of one PubMed-cited other publication (or in press) such as an editorial, review, case report or letter
Or,
I have written a chapter of a book related to medicine in its broadest sense (does not include self-published books)
|
4 |
This refers to medicine in its broadest sense and not just hospital medicine
Books must be published by an independent publishing house, that is, not self-published
|
| I have published one or more abstracts, non peer-reviewed articles or published articles that are not PubMed-cited |
3 |
This article does not need to be medically focused but you should add comments below to justify its relevance to your application for the purposes of verification
|
| None of the above |
0 |
Not applicable |
Glossary of publication terms
| Term |
Definition |
| In press |
This means that your piece has been fully accepted for publication; no further alterations are required; and it is just waiting to be published. |
| PubMed |
Virtually all published articles relevant to medicine will have a unique PubMed identification number (PMID) assigned to it. If a published article does not have a PMID, it is unlikely to be relevant here. |
| Peer-reviewed |
This means that your piece has been sent to one or more independent reviewers prior to acceptance for publication. |
| Submitted article |
This cannot gain any marks at the short-listing stage, because it is not known if it will be published. However, you may wish to mention it to support your application. |
| First author |
This means first on the list of authors. |
| Joint-first-author |
This is a specific definition and will be specified in the publication. |
| Co-author |
This means that you are on the list of authors, but are not first or joint-first author. |
| 'Other' publication |
Anything that is not an original research article (or book/chapter). For example, editorials, reviews, abstracts, case reports and letters. On-line discussion forums or posted articles do not count. |
| Original research |
This s covers basic scientific research as well as systematic reviews/metaanalyses. |
Domain 4: Teaching Experience
| Option |
Score |
Notes |
|
I have worked with local tutors to design and organise a teaching programme (a series of sessions) to enhance locally organised teaching for healthcare professionals or medical students. I have contributed regularly to teaching over a period of approximately 3 months or longer
|
7 |
You have identified a gap in teaching and have worked with local tutors to design and organise a teaching program, and arrange teachers
You have a certificate or letter of recognition of your contribution. You have evidence of this, which could include formal feedback, the programme outline or reflection logs
|
| I have organised a local teaching programme for healthcare professionals or medical students consisting of more than one session and contributed regularly to teaching over a period of approximately 3 months or longer |
6 |
You have worked with local tutors to organise an existing programme and arrange teachers. You have a certificate or letter of recognition of your contribution. You have evidence of this, which could include formal feedback, the programme outline or reflection logs. |
| I have provided regular teaching for healthcare professionals or medical students over a period of approximately 3 months or longer |
4 |
For example, regular bedside or classroom teaching, acting as a mentor to a student or acting as a tutor in a virtual learning environment
You have a certificate or letter of recognition of your contribution. You have evidence of this, which could include formal feedback, the programme outline or reflection logs
|
| I have taught medical students or other healthcare professionals occasionally |
2 |
You have provided teaching on an ad hoc basis. You have evidence of this, which could include formal feedback, the programme outline or reflection logs |
| None of the above |
0 |
Not applicable |
Timescale of programmes
It is difficult to be prescriptive about timescales as it will depend on the regularity and length of the sessions. What is important is that a lasting commitment to a meaningful teaching programme can be demonstrated. Therefore, you will need to use your professional judgement if your programme was less than 3 months on whether you can reasonably select this option and provide evidence accordingly.
Glossary of teaching section terms
| Term |
Definition |
| Local |
This means the programme is confined to a local hospital, Trust or university setting. |
| Designing and organising |
This means you have identified a gap in the teaching provided and have worked with local tutors to design and organise a teaching programme, arrange teachers and contributed regularly to the teaching for the defined period. |
| Substantial training in teaching |
This means you have undergone formal training, lasting more than 2 days (whole time equivalent). Substantial training is defined here as more than usual short (one or 2 day) course which is mandatory for most trainee doctors, and more than the usual online modules completed in a few hours. This does not necessarily need to be a single course but where multiple courses have been attended, these must be complementary and not covering similar topics.
Evidence of attendance and reflection on learning should be available.
|
| Feedback |
This means you have either evidence of senior observation and feedback (for example Developing the Clinical Teacher form) or that there has been collection and analysis of participants' feedback forms and independent verification. Independent feedback should ideally be supported by a letter or certificate from a course organiser/deputy, local tutors or a report detailing the analysis. It is also important that you have reflected upon feedback received and can coment on this on your application form and at interview if questioned. |
Domain 5: Training in teaching
| Option |
Score |
Notes |
| I have been awarded a 3-year masters level teaching qualification |
6 |
This could be full time or part-time over multiple years |
| I have a higher qualification in teaching (for example, Postgraduate Certificate (PG Cert) or Postgraduate Certificate (PG) Diploma |
5 |
Not applicable |
| I have had substantial training in teaching methods lasting more than 2 days |
2 |
This should be additional to any training received as part of your primary medical qualification |
| I have had training in teaching methods lasting 2 days or less |
1 |
This should be additional to any training received as part of your primary medical qualification |
| I have had no training in teaching methods |
0 |
Not applicable |
Domain 6: Quality Improvement (QI)
| Option |
Score |
Notes |
| I played a leading role in the design and implementation of a sustainable change (that is, more than one completed Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA) cycle in a radiology related subject using QI methodology and I have presented the complete results at a meeting |
12 |
You had a lead role in devising the question to be asked (or how an existing project could be developed further/sustained), developing the project plan, identifying potential solutions, implementing repeated change cycles, collating and presenting the data (which could be via a poster), and identifying sustainability for the work. You can clearly evidence each cycle
It is likely that this involved working as part of a team but you must evidence your own role within the QI activity with demonstrable leadership in design, implementation and learning
|
| I played a leading role in the design and implementation of a sustainable change (that is more than one completed PDSA cycle) using QI methodology, and I have presented the complete results at a meeting |
10 |
You had a lead role in devising the question to be asked (or how an existing project could be developed further/sustained), developing the project plan, identifying potential solutions, implementing repeated change cycles, collating and presenting the data (which could be via a poster), and identifying sustainability for the work. You can clearly evidence each cycle
It is likely that this involved working as part of a team but you must evidence your own role within the QI activity with demonstrable leadership in design, implementation and learning
|
|
I have actively participated in the design and implementation of a change (that is, at least one completed PDSA cycle) using QI methodology and I have presented the complete results at a meeting
Or,
I played a leading role in the design and implementation of a change (that is, at least one completed PDSA cycle) using QI methodology, but I have not presented the results
|
8 |
You participated actively through at least one cycle and presented the findings (which could be via a poster), but did not take a leading role in the project. You can clearly evidence the cycle(s) and your role
As above, but the work was not presented by you. You can clearly evidence the cycle(s) and your role
|
| I have actively participated in the design and implementation of a change (that is, at least one completed PDSA cycle) using QI methodology, and I have presented the complete results at a meeting |
6 |
You participated actively through at least one cycle and presented the findings (which could be via a poster), but did not take a leading role in the project. You can clearly evidence the cycle(s) and your role |
| I have actively participated in the design and implementation of a change (that is, at least one completed PDSA cycle) using QI methodology, but I have not presented the complete results at a meeting |
4 |
You participated actively in the project through at least one cycle but did not take a leading role or present the findings. You can clearly evidence the cycle(s) and your role |
| I have studied QI methodology or undertaken QI training or attended a QI course |
2 |
Not applicable |
| None of the above |
0 |
Not applicable |
Quality improvement
The QI project may be a new project or might involve the further development and sustainability of an existing change project. Clinical audits can be a type of QI project, although not all audits use QI methodology. Your project/audit must demonstrate use of a QI methodology and Plan Do Act (PDSA) cycles or equivalent.
QI activities are commonly carried out as part of a team. This is encouraged and the scoring system is designed to allow the higher marks to be claimed where you played a significant role in all the stages required by the option you selected. Please take note of the following.
- You cannot, in any circumstances, claim a presentation (including posters) of your quality improvement project in the presentation section of the application form. Any presentations relating to audits or quality improvement projects must be detailed here as the scoring system is set to include this
- You can only choose an option based on a single quality improvement project. If you have been involved in more than one, you will need to pick the option corresponding to the highest-scoring statement which is applicable
- For the options that require your project to have undergone more than one completed PDSA cycle, it is permissible to claim for projects where you were only involved in one completed PDSA cycle, provided that additional cycles for that project were completed either before or subsequent to your work and that you show evidence of the additional cycles. If your project has only completed a single cycle the options relevant here are those which gain up to 8 points. If you project has not yet completed a single cycle, you can only select the 'none' option
- You should upload clear evidence of the number of PDSA cycles. It is not enough to say that another cycle was done - you will need to provide evidence of this. You need to provide evidence of the changes made as well as evidence of any presentations delivered. You should explicitly outline your contribution or provide a letter from your supervisor/manager explaining your role. For QI methodology, refer to Plan Do Act Study (PDSA) cycles
Domain 7: Leadership and Management
| Option |
Score |
Notes |
|
I hold/have held a national leadership or managerial role related to the provision of healthcare for 6 or more months and can demonstrate a positive impact
Or,
I hold/have held a national leadership or managerial role in a non-medical voluntary capacity for 6 or more months and can demonstrate a positive impact
|
8 |
Examples include: British Medical Association (BMA) national executive, trainee representative of a specialist society or college or a nationally held leadership and management fellowship
Examples include: charity, scouting/guides, creative arts at a national level
|
| I hold/have held a regional leadership or managerial role related to the provision of healthcare for 6 or more months and can demonstrate a positive impact |
6 |
Examples include a role covering more than one hospital or covering a postgraduate training region |
|
I hold/have held a local leadership or managerial role related to the provision of healthcare for 6 or more months and can demonstrate a positive impact
Or,
I hold/have held a local/regional leadership or managerial role in a non-medical voluntary capacity for 6 or more months and can demonstrate a positive impact
|
4 |
Examples include a role within one hospital or medical school such as a junior doctors' mess president or trainee representative on a hospital committee
Examples include: charity, scouting/guides, sports, creative arts at a local or regional level
|
| None of the above |
0 |
Not applicable |
Domain 8: Radiology Reporting Statistics
| Option |
Score |
Notes |
| I have evidence of reporting over 3500 examinations over the last 2 years |
8 |
This can cover all modalities where you are the 1st, 2nd or 3rd reporter |
| I have evidence of reporting 2501 to 2999 examinations over the last 2 years |
6 |
This can cover all modalities where you are the 1st, 2nd or 3rd reporter |
| I have evidence of reporting 1500 to 2500 examinations over the last 2 years |
4 |
This can cover all modalities where you are the 1st, 2nd or 3rd reporter |
| I have evidence of reporting less than 1499 examinations over the last 2 years |
2 |
This can cover all modalities where you are the 1st, 2nd or 3rd reporter |
Page last reviewed: 12 November 2024
Next review due: 12 November 2026