The Radiology Job Market: Analysis of the ACR Jobs Board

The radiology job market in the Netherlands: which subspecialties and other skills are in demand?

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the current job market for medical specialists in radiology and nuclear medicine (NM) in the Netherlands.

METHODS

Vacancies posted for radiologists and nuclear medicine physicians in the Netherlands between December 2020 and February 2022 were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 157 vacancies (146 for radiologist and 11 for nuclear medicine physicians) were included. The most sought-after subspecialties were all-round (22%), abdominal (19%), and interventional radiology (14%), and 30% of vacancies preferred applicants with additional non-clinical skills (research, teaching, management, information and communications technology (ICT)/artificial intelligence (AI)). Non-academic hospitals significantly more frequently requested all-round radiologists (n = 31) than academic hospitals (n = 1) (p = 0.001), while the distribution of other requested subspecialties was not significantly different between non-academic and academic vacancies. Non-academic hospitals also significantly more frequently requested additional research tasks in their vacancies (n = 35) compared to academic hospitals (n = 4) (p = 0.011). There were non-significant trends for non-academic hospitals more frequently requesting teaching tasks in their vacancies (n =18) than academic hospitals (n = 1) (p = 0.051), and for non-academic hospitals more frequently asking for management skills (n = 11) than academic hospitals (n = 0) (p = 0.075).

CONCLUSION

All-round, abdominal, and interventional radiologists are most in demand on the job market in the Netherlands. All-round radiologists are particularly sought after by non-academic hospitals, whereas nuclear radiologists who completed the Dutch integrated NM and radiology residency seem to be welcomed by hospitals searching for a nuclear medicine specialist. Finally, non-clinical skills (research, teaching, management, ICT/AI) are commonly requested. These data can be useful for residents and developers of training curricula.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

An overview of the radiology job market and the requested skills is important for residents, for those who seek work as a radiologist, and for those who are involved in the design and revision of residency programs.

KEY POINTS

Review of job vacancies over an extended period of time provides valuable information to residents and feedback to potentially improve radiology and nuclear medicine (NM) residency programs. All-round radiologists are wanted in non-academic hospitals and nuclear radiologists (those who have completed an integrated NM-radiology curriculum) are welcomed by hospitals searching for nuclear medicine specialists in the Netherlands. There is a need to train residents in important non-clinical skills, such as research and teaching, but also management and communications technology/artificial intelligence.

Analysis of 10 Years of Diagnostic Radiology Match Data: Notable Changes and Their Potential Implications

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Identification of shifts in match metrics, such as applicant volumes, match rates, and interview patterns, stands to inform and empower both applicants and programs participating in the NRMP residency match. Residency programs rarely publish their internal data. Accordingly, we employed publicly available resources to evaluate changes in such metrics for the diagnostic radiology match from 2008 to 2018.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Reports made available to the public by the NRMP, alongside student discussion on the AuntMinnie.com and StudentDoctor.net forums, were used to determine applicant volumes, interview volumes, program rank-order-list metrics, match rates, and interview invite patterns. Linear regression and correlation analyses were employed to identify statistically significant trends.

RESULTS

No statistically significant trends were identified across the selected timeframe for applicant volumes or match rates. Statistically significant upward trends were identified for total interview volumes, average interviews attended per applicant, and the fraction of programs inviting students to interview before October 1st, the MSPE release date (p < 0.05). A very strong and significant positive correlation was identified between average interviews attended per applicant and the average number of ranks needed by programs to fill a position (p < 0.01, R = 0.804).

CONCLUSION

Applicants pursuing a diagnostic radiology residency are attending more interviews, and programs are increasingly inviting students to interview based on incomplete applications. However, there has been no corresponding uptrend in match rates. Moreover, increased applicant interview attendance is highly associated with programs falling further down their rank lists. Given the expenses usually associated with the match process and forthcoming changes to USMLE scoring, these trends may be unsustainable.

Defining the abdominal radiologist based on the current U.S. job market

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study is to characterize current practice patterns of abdominal radiologists based on work descriptions within job postings on numerous national radiology specialty websites.

METHODS

Job postings for either "abdominal" or "body" radiologists were searched weekly on five society websites (SAR, SCBT-MR, ARRS, ACR, RSNA) over a 1-year period. Postings were reviewed for various characteristics.

RESULTS

Nine hundred and sixteen total ads for 341 unique abdominal radiologist positions were reviewed (34.6% academic, 64.2% private practice, 1.2% other). Postings occurred most commonly in March (12.3%) and least commonly in November (4.8%). States with most positions were Florida (27), California (26), and New York (24). Of postings delineating expectations of specific abdominal modalities, 67.4% mentioned MRI, 58.5% ultrasound, 41.1% fluoroscopy, 14.3% PET, and 54.0% interventions. Additional non-abdominal expectations included general radiology (28.7%), breast imaging (21.1%), and general nuclear medicine (9.7%). Additional skills included prostate MRI (7.0%), OBGYN ultrasound (5.0%), and CT colonoscopy (2.6%). 79.2% required an abdominal imaging fellowship (specifically a body MRI fellowship in 4.1%).

CONCLUSION

By using job postings for abdominal radiologists, we have taken a practical approach to characterizing the current status of this subspecialty, reflecting recent job expectations and requirements. The large majority of positions required a body fellowship, and the positions commonly entailed a variety of skills beyond non-invasive diagnostic abdominal imaging. Of note, expectations of considerable minorities of positions included abdominal interventions, general radiology, and breast imaging. These insights may guide the development of abdominal radiology fellowships and mini-fellowships, as well as assist radiologists entering or returning to the job market.

Evaluating Factors and Resources Affecting Ranking of Diagnostic Radiology Residency Programs by Medical Students in 2016-2017

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Recent changes in radiology curriculum and access to residency program information, including the introduction of various online resources and the Interventional Radiology integrated pathway, may influence the rank list order of medical student applicants. The purpose of this study is to assess factors that affect the rank lists of medical students applying to our radiology residency program in the 2016-2017 academic year.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After IRB approval, an anonymous online 19 question survey was emailed to 622 applicants to our diagnostic radiology and/or interventional radiology integrated pathway. Applicants ranked 35 unique factors that may influence their residency rank list order from 1 (not important at all) to 5 (very important), listed their top five 'very important' factors, and ranked various sources of information used to learn about residency programs. General applicant demographic questions were also included.

RESULTS

Response rate was 18.8% (117/622). The 5 most important factors affecting applicant ranking of programs are perceived happiness of the residents and faculty (4.69), fellowship and job placement of recent graduates (4.34), interactions with programs' current residents (4.33), stability of the department and program (4.29), and geographic location of the program (4.27). The top 5 resources for learning about residency programs were interactions with current residents at the program (4.47), program director (3.87), and interviewing faculty (3.87). Individual program websites were ranked more highly than internet message boards and forums as an information source.

CONCLUSION

Medical students consider a large number of factors and resources in determining their rank lists, with factors encountered during the interview day playing a significant role in shaping the applicants' view of a residency program.