The Impact of Graduates' Job Preferences on the Current Radiation Oncology Job Market

• Type of Material: Article
• Authors: Mudit Chowdhary, Rush University; Jeffrey Switchenko, Emory University; Neilayan Sen, Rush University; Arpit M. Chhabra, Univ Maryland; Leah M. Katz, New York Presbyterian Hudson Valley Hosp; Naresh K. Jegadeesh, Rush University; Parul N. Barry, Rush University; Dian Wang, Rush University; Trevor J. Royce, University of North Carolina; Walter Curran Jr, Emory University; Neha Vapiwala, University of Pennsylvania; Lynn D. Wilson, Yale University; Ross A. Abrams, Rush University; Gaurav Marwaha, Rush University; Kirtesh R. Patel, Yale University
• Language: English
• Date: 2019-05-01
• Publisher: Elsevier Science Inc.
• Publication Version: Author Accepted Manuscript (After Peer Review)
• Copyright Statement: © 2018 Elsevier Inc.
• License: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International
• Final Published Version (URL): http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.12.026
• Title of Journal or Parent Work: International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
• Volume: 104
• Issue: 1
• Start Page: 27
• End Page: 32
• Grant/Funding Information: Research reported in this publication was supported in part by the Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Shared Resource of Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University and National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute under award number P30CA138292.
• Keywords: ASSOCIATION; GEOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS; Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging; Oncology; Science & Technology; Life Sciences & Biomedicine
• Research Categories: Health Sciences, Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: To examine the role of radiation oncology (RO) graduates’ application patterns and personal preferences in current labor concerns. Methods and Materials: An anonymous, voluntary survey was distributed to 665 domestic RO graduates from 2013 to 2017. Questions assessed graduates’ regional (Northeast [NE]; Midwest [MW]; South [SO]; West [WT]) job type and population size preferences. Top regional choice was compared across other categorical and numerical variables using the χ 2 test and analysis of variance, respectively. Results: Complete responses were obtained from 299 (45.0% response rate) participants: 82 (27.4%), 74 (24.7%), 85 (28.4%), and 58 (19.4%) graduated from NE, MW, SO, and WT programs. The most to least commonly applied regions were SO (69.2%), MW (55.9%), and then NE/WT (55.2% each). The first and last regional choices were the WT (29.4%) and MW (15.7%), respectively. The most and least common application and top choice preferences were consistent in terms of city size: >500,000 (86.0% and 64.5%, respectively) and <100,001 (26.1% and 7.0%, respectively). The majority of applicants applied to both academic and nonacademic positions (60.9%), with top job type choice being equally split. The majority of respondents independently received a job offer in their preferred region (75.3%), city population size (72.6%) or job type (81.9%). Additionally, 52.5% received a job offer that included all three preferences. Those who underwent residency training (44.3% vs 62.0%-83.6%, P <.001) or medical schooling (50.7% vs 56.3%-75.6%, P <.001) or grew up in the MW (60.8% vs 70.0%-74.7%, P <.001) were least likely to choose this region as their top regional choice compared with other regions. Conclusions: The MW and jobs in smaller cities are less appealing to RO graduates, even if they receive training in the MW, which may contribute to current job market concerns. Nonetheless, the majority of respondents received a job offer in the region, population size, and job type of their top choice. Assessing prospective candidates’ city size and geographic preferences and prioritizing applicants who are compatible with positions may help address potential job market discrepancies.