Declining Medical Student Interest in Radiation Oncology: Wake-Up Call With a Silver Lining?

Evaluation of a National Radiation Oncology Research and Mentorship Program

PURPOSE

The Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology Annual Scientific Meeting Medical Student Research and Mentorship Award was established in 2020 to support medical students pursuing radiation oncology (RO) research and RO as a career. This study is an evaluation of the effect of this national research and mentorship award on medical students, resident mentors, and research supervisors over 3 iterations.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Three separate surveys were created for medical student mentees, RO resident mentors, and attending research supervisors. These surveys were developed using best practice strategies for medical education surveys and circulated for peer review among experts in oncology medical education. The surveys were sent to the 52 individuals (18 students, 18 residents, 16 supervisors) who participated in 3 cycles of Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology ASM MSRMA (2020-21, 2021-22, 2022-23). After anonymization, quantitative answers were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and narrative responses were evaluated using a grounded theory approach.

RESULTS

There was a 90% survey response rate. For medical student mentees, the award maintained (71%) or increased (24%) interest in pursuing an RO career. Students reported receiving helpful tips for residency applications and insight into RO residency, research, and career planning advice. Only the first student cohort currently has matching results for residency, with approximately 50% matching to RO. All resident mentor respondents felt the program either maintained or increased motivation to mentor students in RO. Research project supervisors unanimously enjoyed their role in this program and would recommend and participate in this program again.

CONCLUSIONS

A national research and mentorship award for medical students has shown a positive effect on participants. Medical students felt this award program motivated them to continue pursuing oncology research and a potential career in RO. The program also enhanced mentorship skills in residents and research supervisors, which encourages further RO mentorship, teaching, and exposure for future generations of students.

Assessment of Student Perceptions of Aspects of a Career in Radiation Oncology

PURPOSE

To determine medical students' views of various aspects of a career in radiation oncology (RO) to identify areas that may benefit from reform and to guide initiatives to stimulate broader and more diverse student interest in the specialty.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

An electronic survey was sent to student oncology interest group members at seven US medical schools. The survey asked students to rate 19 aspects of RO on a 5-point bipolar Likert-type scale. Descriptive statistics are reported, along with subgroup analyses based on participants' demographics.

RESULTS

The response rate was 51.1% (n = 275 of 538). The most favorably rated aspects of RO were outpatient working hours (mean ± SD Likert-type rating of 4.51 ± 0.82), routinely working with other physicians (4.45 ± 0.76), and use of advanced technology to treat patients. The most unfavorably rated aspects of RO were less geographic flexibility for residency or employment (1.98 ± 1.04), spending a lot of time on a computer doing treatment planning (2.80 ± 1.21), and having a job that is not well understood by most doctors and the general public (2.89 ± 1.02). Gender was associated with significant differences in 8 of 19 questions in how each aspect of RO was viewed. Few differences were observed based on race or ethnicity, though Asian participants had a significantly more favorable view of RO being a more science-oriented specialty compared with White or underrepresented students, respectively (3.50 versus 3.21 versus 2.84, P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings inform the RO community in the development of more effective initiatives to encourage students to fully explore the specialty.

Leveling Up the Access to Radiation Therapy in Latin America: Economic Analysis of Investment, Equity, and Inclusion Opportunities Up to 2030

PURPOSE

Latin America faces a shortage in radiation therapy (RT) units and qualified personnel for timely and high-quality treatment of patients with cancer. Investing in equitable and inclusive access to RT over the next decade would prevent thousands of deaths. Measuring the investment gap and payoff is necessary for stakeholder discussions and capacity planning efforts.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Data were collected from the International Atomic Energy Agency's Directory of Radiotherapy Centers, industry stakeholders, and individual surveys sent to national scientific societies. Nationwide data on available devices and personnel were compiled. The 10 most common cancers in 2020 with RT indication and their respective incidence rates were considered for gap calculations. The gross 2-year financial return on investment was calculated based on an average monthly salary across Latin America. A 10-year cost projection was calculated according to the estimated population dynamics for the period until 2030.

RESULTS

Eleven countries were included in the study, accounting for 557,213,447 people in 2020 and 561 RT facilities. Approximately 1,065,684 new cancer cases were diagnosed, and a mean density of 768,469 (standard deviation ±392,778) people per available unit was found. By projecting the currently available treatment fractions to determine those required in 2030, it was found that 62.3% and 130.8% increases in external beam RT and brachytherapy units are needed from the baseline, respectively. An overall regional investment of approximately United States (US) $349,650,480 in 2020 would have covered the existing demand. An investment of US $872,889,949 will be necessary by 2030, with the expectation of a 2-year posttreatment gross return on investment of more than US $2.1 billion from patients treated in 2030 only.

CONCLUSIONS

Investment in RT services is lagging in Latin America in terms of the population's needs. An accelerated outlay could save additional lives during the next decade, create a self-sustaining system, and reduce region-wide inequities in cancer care access. Cash flow analyses are warranted to tailor precise national-level intervention strategies.