Original article
Results of the 2013 Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology Career Planning Survey of Practicing Physicians in the United States

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2013.12.027Get rights and content

Purpose

The goal of this study was to develop insights about the job application process for graduating radiation oncology residents from the perspective of those involved in hiring.

Methods

In May and June 2013, a nationwide electronic survey was sent to 1,671 practicing radiation oncologists in academic and private practice settings. Descriptive statistics are reported. In addition, subgroup analysis was performed.

Results

Surveys were completed by 206 physicians. Ninety-six percent were willing to hire individuals directly from residency. Participants believed that the first half of the fourth postgraduate year is the most appropriate time for residents to begin networking and the beginning of the fifth postgraduate year is the most appropriate time to begin contacting practices in pursuit of employment. Seventy percent began interviewing 4 to 9 months before the job start date, and 84% interviewed ≤6 candidates per available position. The 5 most important factors to participants when evaluating prospective candidates were (from most to least important) work ethic, personality, interview impression, experience in intensity-modulated radiation therapy, and flexibility. Factors that participants believed should be most important to candidates when evaluating practices included a collegial environment; emphasis on best patient care; quality of equipment, physics, dosimetry, and quality assurance; quality of the support staff and facility; and a multidisciplinary approach to patient care. Those in academics rated research-related factors higher than those in private practice, who rated business-related factors higher.

Conclusions

The perspectives of practicing physicians on the job application process are documented to provide a comprehensive resource for current and future residents and employers.

Introduction

Founded in 1982, the Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology (ARRO) has represented radiation oncology residents in the United States and has conducted surveys of these residents for almost 3 decades 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. These surveys provide unique insights into radiation oncology residency training. In 2011, ARRO recognized the need for residents to better understand the processes involved with securing postresidency employment. The first phase of this project was to survey graduating residents to determine which factors were most important to them when deciding on a first job and also what timeline was used to complete important tasks of the job application process [9]. The second phase of this project was to survey practicing physicians in both academic and private practice settings using a similar set of questions. The ultimate goal was to obtain information on the factors important to practicing physicians when hiring graduating residents and to corroborate the findings from the resident survey and assess any discrepancies. The results from the survey of practicing physicians are reported here.

Section snippets

Methods

A web-based survey was developed in accordance with applicable Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys criteria [10], using as a guide data presented at the 2010 ARRO Career Seminar during the 52nd Annual Meeting of the American Society for Radiation Oncology in San Diego and the 2012 to 2013 career planning survey for graduating residents [9]. The survey was composed of 3 main sections. The first section collected demographic information detailing the participants' practice

Results

A total of 1,671 surveys were e-mailed, and 206 responses were received, 72% (n = 149) from participants in private practice, 21% (n = 44) from participants in academics, and 7% (n = 13) from respondents who identified themselves as in both private practice and academics. This represents response rates of approximately 25% (44 of 172) for the academic physician list and 10% (144 of 1,499) for the private practice physician list. The demographics of the survey participants are shown in Table 1.

Discussion

The data presented herein come from a survey distributed to practicing physicians in radiation oncology, with particular focus on the job application process of graduating residents. A similar survey was distributed to graduating residents in the final months of their training in 2012 and 2013. The ultimate goal of this complementary study is to corroborate and enhance the findings from the resident survey to provide residents with a comprehensive tool to assist them as they evaluate and apply

Take-Home Points

  • In this study, we have examined the views of practicing radiation oncologists in academic and private practice settings to provide further details on the job application process for graduating residents from the perspective of those involved in hiring.

  • The first half of PGY 4 is the most appropriate time for residents to begin networking, and the beginning of PGY 5 is the most appropriate time to begin contacting practices in pursuit of employment.

  • The most common time to start interviewing is 4

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the additional effort provided by Michael Steinberg and the administrative support of Cristin Watson, Lisa Cheak, and Kathy Thomas of the American Society of Radiation Oncology.

References (10)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (2)

  • Results of the 2014 Survey of the Association of Directors of Radiation Oncology Programs (ADROP)

    2015, Practical Radiation Oncology
    Citation Excerpt :

    The results of the current survey can assist program directors, chairpersons, and administrators in seeing how their individual programs compare to others nationwide along major axes. Future directions for ADROP are for the leadership and membership to discuss how the content of future ADROP surveys can be dovetailed with corresponding resident surveys4-6 and chairperson surveys.7-8 The ADROP membership will also discuss our current survey results in comparison with other instruments, such as the program director burnout survey (Aggarwal et al, unpublished data, 2015).

View full text