What Program Directors Think: Results of the 2011 Annual Survey of the Association of Program Directors in Radiology

doi:10.1016/j.acra.2012.08.009

Academic Radiology

Volume 19, Issue 12, December 2012, Pages 1583-1588

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2012.08.009 Get rights and content

Rationale and Objectives

The Association of Program Directors in Radiology (APDR) conducts an annual survey to monitor and evaluate issues pertaining to radiology residents' educational experiences, work responsibilities, and benefits. Data are used to identify emerging trends and patterns of change to plan and provide resources that support radiology residency programs and their directors.

Materials and Methods

The APDR Annual Survey Committee selected 59 items for an observational, cross-sectional study using a Web-based survey. Topics of interest included program director satisfaction, resident recruitment, social media, program requirements, curriculum, the new American Board of Radiology exam process, call, and residents-as-teachers programs. All active APDR members (n = 296) were invited to participate in survey between February 20 and March 11, 2011.

Results

The response rate was 47% (140 of 296). Descriptive results were tallied using SurveyMonkey software, and qualitative responses were tabulated or summarized as comments. Findings were reported during the 59th annual meeting of the Association of University Radiologists.

Conclusions

Data generated by the annual survey enable the APDR to accrue data pertaining to residents' real-time educational experiences. In 2011, program directors were satisfied with their jobs but not convinced that competency-based program requirements had positive effect on residency training. Programs plan to use the Radiological Society of North America and American Association of Physicists in Medicine Web-based physics training modules. Most radiology programs do not have residents-as-teachers programs, nor do they plan to initiate them. During recruitment, programs use an applicant's location as a proxy for true interest in the program, and interest in the program is important for granting interviews and final ranking. Qualified international medical graduate applicants have access to radiology training in the United States and Canada. Almost half of radiology programs have in-house reading by attending radiologists with residents on call. Residency programs have been slow to embrace social media.

Section snippets

Materials and methods

This was an observational, cross-sectional study using a Web-based survey. Members of the 2010–2011 Annual Survey Committee selected survey items from those written and proposed by committee members and APDR leadership. The resulting instrument had 59 items, including demographic data. Topics queried included PD satisfaction, resident recruitment, use of social media, program requirements, curricula and the new ABR exam process, call structure, and residents-as-teachers programs. The survey was

Demographics

Of active APDR members, 47% (140 of 296) participated in the survey. This was the largest response ever and a 40% increase over the previous year (Kristin Jacob, APDR account manager, personal communication, January 6, 2012). Most respondents were full-time faculty members, representing academic ranks from professor (29% [39 of 137]) to associate professor (32% [44 of 137]) to assistant professor (26% [35 of 137]). Those who identified themselves as “other” (14% [19 of 137]) were instructors or

Discussion

The 2011 APDR annual survey generated the largest response ever. The response rate of 47% is in line with average response rates for mail surveys reported by Baruch and Brooks (2) in 2008. Like prior surveys, the 2011 survey focused on areas of concern to the membership by using a cross-sectional design observational study to answer the question, “What is happening right now?”

The study had several limitations. Because not all ACGME-accredited PDs are APDR members, there may have been a

Conclusions

Data generated by the annual survey enable the APDR to accrue and document data pertaining to residents' real-time educational experiences. In 2011, an overwhelming majority of PDs were satisfied with their jobs. As a group, PDs were not convinced that competency-based program requirements have had positive effect on residency training. Overwhelmingly, PDs plan to use the RSNA and AAPM Web-based physics training modules. Most radiology programs do not have residents-as-teachers programs, nor do

References (27)

D.L. Sackett
Bias in analytic research
J Chron Dis
(1979)
D.A. Jamadar et al.
Estimating the effects of informal radiology resident teaching on radiologist productivity: what is the cost of teaching?
Acad Radiol
(2005)
J.G. Bell et al.
Selection of obstetrics and gynecology residents on the basis of medical school performance
Am J Obstet Gynecol
(2002)
R.B. Gunderman et al.
The value of good medical student teaching: increasing the number of radiology residency applicants
Acad Radiol
(2000)
T.B. Hunter et al.
Academic radiologists' on-call and late-evening duties
J Am Coll Radiol
(2007)
T.S. Desser et al.
Coverage of emergency after-hours ultrasound cases: survey of practices at U.S. teaching hospitals
Acad Radiol
(2006)
A. Donovan
Radiology resident teaching skills improvement: impact of a resident teacher training program
Acad Radiol
(2011)
A. Donovan
Radiology residents as teachers: current status of teaching skills training in United States residency programs
Acad Radiol
(2010)
W.R. Hendee
An opportunity for radiology: recommendations from the educational summit
Radiology
(2006)
Y. Baruch et al.
Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research
Hum Relat
(2008)

R.A. Berk

An introduction to sample selection bias in sociological data

Am Sociol Rev

(1983)

A. Tversky et al.

The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice

Science

(1981)

F. Kreuter et al.

Social desirability bias in CATI, IVR, and Web surveys: the effect of mode and question sensitivity

Public Opin Q

(2008)

Cited by (17)

The Evolving Status of Fellowships and Mini-Fellowships in Diagnostic Radiology: A Survey of Program Directors and Chief Residents
2021, Academic Radiology
Citation Excerpt :
This paper describes the results of a cross sectional study of United States fellowship and mini-fellowship opportunities in diagnostic radiology conducted by the task force. Similar in design to other published surveys of program directors and chief residents (2,11,15–25), this survey aims to summarize current trends and opinions about fellowships and mini-fellowships in DR. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the lead author's institution and exempted from further review and monitoring.
Recent changes in radiology fellowships include musculoskeletal radiology adopting a match system, interventional radiology transitioning away from diagnostic radiology to offer direct-entry programs, and a common fellowship application timeline created by the Society for Chairs of Academic Radiology Departments (SCARD). The concept of mini-fellowships has also emerged with the elimination of the oral American Board of Radiology examinations that had been administered in the final year of residency training prior to 2014. This paper seeks to assess the opinions of fellowship program directors, residency program directors, and chief residents regarding these recent changes.
This is a cross-sectional study using a web-based survey posed to fellowship program directors, residency program directors, and chief residents in 2020. Questions sought to explore current attitudes toward the following topics: (1) a common fellowship application timeline; (2) a common fellowship match; and (3) the status of mini-fellowships in diagnostic radiology. In addition, the number of fellowship positions for each subspecialty was estimated using subspecialty society directories, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) data, and individual program websites.
Deidentified responses were collected electronically and aggregated. The three respondent groups preferred a common fellowship application timeline at rates of 67% among fellowship program directors, 80% residency program directors, and 74% residents. A common match system across all subspecialties was preferred at rates of 50% fellowship program directors, 74% residency program directors, and 26% chief residents. There was widespread reported compliance with the SCARD fellowship timeline policy. Subspecialty programs using the match system reported interviewing greater numbers of applicants per position. Fellowship directors and chief residents reported that the most common duration of mini-fellowship experiences was 2 to 3 months.
There is a division between chief residents and program directors regarding the preference for a common radiology match. Adopting a radiology-wide fellowship match would increase the number of interviews required. The SCARD fellowship timeline policy has been successful, and there is support across stakeholders regarding the common timeline. Mini-fellowships are highly variable in length and structure.
“What Program Directors Think” V: Results of the 2019 Spring Survey of the Association of Program Directors in Radiology (APDR)
2021, Academic Radiology
The Association of Program Directors in Radiology (APDR) surveys its membership annually on hot topics and new developments in radiology residency training. Here we report the results of that annual survey.
A web-based survey was posed to the APDR membership in the Fall of 2018. Members were asked 43 questions on program staffing, resident education resources/funding, impact of the integrated-Interventional Radiology residency program on Diagnostic Radiology program resources, resident interest in imaging informatics, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requirements on resident practice habits data reporting, institutional reliance on residents for clinical coverage, teaching format in the post-oral board era, resident conference attendance, confidentiality of the Match rank list, Early Specialization in Interventional Radiology pathway recruitment and selection, Diagnostic Radiology and Interventional Radiology program relationships, independent resident call, pediatric radiology training, diversity and unconscious bias training, and social media in radiology education.
Responses were collected electronically, results were tallied using Qualtrics software, and qualitative responses were tabulated or summarized as comments. There were 86 respondents with a response rate of 31.3%.
Survey result highlights include perceived resident interest in imaging informatics with the vast majority of residency programs offering an informatics curriculum; the provision of resident practice habits data by nearly all residency programs despite lack of clarity surrounding this Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requirement; continued use of case-taking in the post-oral boards era; frequent disclosure of the Match rank list to departmental and hospital administration; low penetration of unconscious bias training in academic radiology; and finally, the successful integration of interventional and diagnostic radiology training programs.
“What program directors think IV”: Results of the 2017 Annual Survey of the Association of Program Directors in Radiology
2019, Academic Radiology
The Association of Program Directors in Radiology (APDR) regularly surveys its members to gather information regarding a broad range of topics related to radiology residency. The survey results provide insight into the opinions of residency program leadership across the country.
This is an observational cross-sectional study using a web-based survey posed to the APDR membership in the fall of 2017. The final survey consisted of 53 items, 48 multiple choice questions and five write-in comments. An invitation to complete the survey was sent to all 319 active APDR members.
Deidentified responses were collected electronically, tallied utilizing Qualtrics software, and aggregated for the purposes of analysis and reporting at the 66th annual meeting of the Association of University Radiologists. The response rate was 36%.
Over the past 16 years, more PDs have assistant and APDs to administer growing residency programs, but the time allocation for these APDs has come from the PD's protected time. An overwhelming majority of PDs consider independent call beneficial to residents and most think a call assistant is desirable. The vast majority of PDs support a unified fellowship match and allow resident moonlighting. Most fourth year residents are actively or moderately involved in clinical work and teaching. The majority of PDs have lost or expect to lose DR training positions to the new IR/DR programs. In a competitive match, PDs do not rely on residency interviews in their selection process.
Designing a Comprehensive Undergraduate Medical Education Radiology Curriculum Using the 5C's of Radiology Education Framework
2018, Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal
Citation Excerpt :
Furthermore, having residents assume more of the teaching responsibilities protects faculty time for resident education. Currently, resident-teacher training programs have been established in less than 12% of American radiology residency programs [34], but studies implementing such programs show positive results [35,36]. To illustrate the use of the 5C's when creating a curriculum, a proposed outline for radiology education in the undergraduate medical curriculum based on the 5C's of Radiology framework is provided (Figure 2).
The 5C's of Radiology Education is a tool created from a recent qualitative study designed to explore how radiology exposures impact medical student opinions and perceptions of radiology and radiologists. It outlines the factors that the medical students identified as important for their radiology education. These factors are curriculum, coaching, collaborating, career, and commitment. The purpose of this paper is to provide a review of the literature of undergraduate medical education both broadly and more specifically to radiology education using the 5C's of Radiology Education framework.
Les cinq C de la formation en radiologie désignent un outil créé à partir d'une étude qualitative récente qui visait à examiner dans quelle mesure l'exposition à la radiologie influe sur les opinions et les perceptions des étudiants en médecine au sujet de la radiologie et des radiologistes. Il met en lumière les facteurs que les étudiants en médecine jugent importants pour leur formation en radiologie, à savoir la matière, l'encadrement, la collaboration, la carrière et l'engagement (les cinq C en anglais: curriculum, coaching, collaborating, career et commitment). L'objectif de cet article est d'examiner la documentation relative à la formation de premier cycle en médecine, tant de manière générale que par rapport à la formation en radiologie, à l'aide des cinq C du cadre de formation en radiologie.
Diagnostic Radiology Resident Recruitment Part I: Advice to Programs (and Program Directors) From Vice Chairs for Education
2018, Academic Radiology
To the best of our knowledge, there is little available organized advice for diagnostic radiology residency program directors and their programs regarding resident recruitment. We are a group of current and former program directors who are current vice chairs for education and continue to advise and to mentor many educators. We have constructed this article along the yearly schedule of trainee recruitment, including an application review, interviews, and troublesome trends that we have observed.
The 2017 Integrated IR Residency Match: Results of a National Survey of Applicants and Program Directors
2018, Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology
To characterize and compare the experiences of matched applicants and program directors (PDs) participating in the first large-scale integrated interventional radiology (IR) residency match.
Survey questionnaires were distributed nationally to integrated IR applicants who matched in the 2017 Match cycle and PDs. Both groups were questioned regarding their experiences with the application, interview, rank, and match processes as well as applicant-specific and PD-specific information. Summary and descriptive statistics were applied to responses, and comparison of Likert scale responses was performed by two-sample t test.
Sixty-one matched applicants (51.3%) and 34 PDs (55.7%) responded to the survey. Regarding the match process, applicants believed United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 score (P = .002) and connection to a program’s geographic location (P = .006) were significantly more important than PDs did, whereas PDs ranked grades (P = .049), class rank (P = .011), academic awards (P = .003), additional degrees (P < .001), and USMLE Step 2 Clinical Skills score (P < .001) as significantly more important factors than applicants did. Additional information regarding demographic data, medical school experiences in IR, application strategies, interview experiences, rank lists, the intern year, and match results are reported.
The completion of the first large-scale integrated IR match represents a paradigm shift in the way in which IR practitioners are recruited and trained. This study provides valuable benchmark data and analysis that can be used to improve efforts to match the best-fitting applicants into the integrated IR residency and improve future match cycles for applicants and PDs alike.

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

Radiologic educationWhat Program Directors Think: Results of the 2011 Annual Survey of the Association of Program Directors in Radiology

Rationale and Objectives

Materials and Methods

Results

Conclusions

Section snippets

Materials and methods

Demographics

Discussion

Conclusions

J Chron Dis

Acad Radiol

Am J Obstet Gynecol

Acad Radiol

J Am Coll Radiol

Acad Radiol

Acad Radiol

Acad Radiol

An opportunity for radiology: recommendations from the educational summit

Radiology

Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research

Hum Relat

An introduction to sample selection bias in sociological data

Am Sociol Rev

The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice

Science

Social desirability bias in CATI, IVR, and Web surveys: the effect of mode and question sensitivity

Public Opin Q

Radiologic education
What Program Directors Think: Results of the 2011 Annual Survey of the Association of Program Directors in Radiology