ARRO Graduating Resident Survey 2020 Update: Bad (?)

[scarbrtj]

Someone retweeted this today, but I guess the data is about a month old. Was this discussed already?

With 98% employment... that doesn't sound bad, right? But it's fragile. The median job offers were 2. Twooooo! Yeesh. This indicates a horribly tight job market IMHO. Of course I am not a labor economist yada yada. But just for kicks, I googled "How many job offers does the average medical resident receive..."

PDs if you were looking for objective data... is this it????

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[thecarbonionangle]

As long as success is defined as you got A job SOMEWHERE with ANY terms, ASTRO will continue to spin it as there are no issues. They also don’t believe new programs are an issue because the WV chair is now in charge of the whole organization. This is a program that has not even filled ONCE outside the soap.

54 pct going into “academics” tells you the market is being propped up by sugar high of institutional spending to hire people and create position. When this saturates, the graduates are fu$$$$

 

[drewdog1973]

ASTRO/ARRO/ABR do not have an interest in fixing the problem. They will obfuscate, mislead, cast aspersions, but they will not do anything to improve the real professional lives of our newest members. This is fact based on past and present behavior.

 

[scarbrtj]

As long as success is defined as you got A job SOMEWHERE with ANY terms, ASTRO will continue to spin it as there are no issues. They also don’t believe new programs are an issue because the WV chair is now in charge of the whole organization. This is a program that has not even filled ONCE outside the soap.

Sad. Because now the proverbial breadlines are not some fairy tale. This is data. I spent 13 years in college, med school, and residency... and I got two job offers after all that. I can picture it now: "My husband did a rad onc residency at MDACC and all I got was this lousy T-shirt and a choice to move the kids to Butte or Dubuque! (And that was with networking!)"

 

[thecarbonionangle]

Institutional spending even wealthy state school associated programs will reach a critical limit eventually and they will not be able to create 3-5 yearly “academic” positions. Money does not grow on trees even if you have an unlimited state funded oil fund

 

[scarbrtj]

54 pct going into “academics” tells you the market is being propped up by sugar high of institutional spending to hire people and create position.

This will saturate. It will come much sooner than robust AI contouring/planning, which will happen this decade. This is so easy to see.

These apply... what I would broadly define as "math" I suppose...
Resident/attending/practicing rad onc expansion, 15 years
Four Diagnoses Keep America's Rad Oncs Afloat

 

[StIGMA]

Saturation has already happened at several programs. We've discussed this before. Smart programs overhired the past couple years with the top med student cohorts because they are making a 10+ year investment in someone statistically better than someone 3-5 years down the road. The current medical students are in trouble. One program had 14 total hires in the past 3 years and 0 planned this year (were not going to hire with or without Covid b/c saturated). Good luck out there.

 

[scarbrtj]

I would also like to reference a quote from one of our leaders, Paul Wallner (who doesn't know how to spell "sophomore"), made in 1997:

"I began radiation oncology practice in 1972, when we were radiation therapists, jobs were plentiful, and we were seeing an explosive growth in training programs."

The question now is: will our leaders be willing to do what it takes to return us to that previous state of "plentiful jobs"?

 

[Chartreuse Wombat]

All is proceeding according to plan. More annual dues/fees for membership organizations. Employers happy as the cost of hiring falls. Tick, tick...

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

People were getting two job offers?

An embarrassment of riches, if you ask me.

 

[Chartreuse Wombat]

People were getting two job offers?

An embarrassment of riches, if you ask me.

Remember ASTRO president said residents should be happy with "a job". Stalin smiles

 

[scarbrtj]

People were getting two job offers?

An embarrassment of riches, if you ask me.

Of course this is funny. But in all seriousness... check out any other field in medicine. Hell, check them out on SDN: "...there are innumerable high-paying opportunities once you finish residency." Were rad onc to halve the number of residents tomorrow, next year's residents would get a total of *4* job offers on average. How many phone calls had to be made... how much groveling and soul-crushing, pride-swallowing smiling and glad-handing had to be performed... just to get those two job offers. Have we forgotten the mathematics of The Match? What if only two programs ranked you nationwide?

I'm not a resident or new grad. But this makes me mad. Were I a resident or new grad, I'd be stropping my blade for battle.

 

[salubalu]

I would also like to reference a quote from one of our leaders, Paul Wallner (who doesn't know how to spell "sophomore"), made in 1997:

"I began radiation oncology practice in 1972, when we were radiation therapists, jobs were plentiful, and we were seeing an explosive growth in training programs."

The question now is: will our leaders be willing to do what it takes to return us to that previous state of "plentiful jobs"?

Lol our med oncs still call us radiation therapists

 

[scarbrtj]

Lol our med oncs still call us radiation therapists

"Blame" the ABR. For those that didn't know:

Before 1979, the ABR issued a certification in "radiology" which covered both diagnostic and therapeutic radiology. Since the ABR certification in "radiology" includes both diagnostic and therapeutic radiology, it is acceptable for certification for authorized user status... However, as with any review of training and experience, the recentness of training and/or certification must be considered. After 1979, the ABR replaced the "radiology" certification with two certifications, "diagnostic radiology" (with an additional designation in "nuclear radiology"), and "therapeutic radiology." ... In 1987, the ABR renamed "therapeutic radiology" as "radiation oncology". The criteria for certification in radiation oncology are the same as those previously required for therapeutic radiology, and the name was changed to more adequately describe the practice.

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

Of course this is funny. But in all seriousness... check out any other field in medicine. Hell, check them out on SDN: "...there are innumerable high-paying opportunities once you finish residency." Were rad onc to halve the number of residents tomorrow, next year's residents would get a total of *4* job offers on average. How many phone calls had to be made... how much groveling and soul-crushing, pride-swallowing smiling and glad-handing had to be performed... just to get those two job offers. Have we forgotten the mathematics of The Match? What if only two programs ranked you nationwide?

I'm not a resident or new grad. But this makes me mad. Were I a resident or new grad, I'd be stropping my blade for battle.

"An embarrassment of riches" is only mildly in jest.

Acknowledging COVID has affected everything, of everyone I know who has signed from my cohort this year (or seems likely to sign), I know of only a single person who was able to entertain >1 RadOnc job offer.

Standard caveats of "it's only December", "the plural of anecdotes is not data", and whatever else the optimistic people like to come on here and say. The offers that are being given have very tight timelines of take-it-or-leave-it, so there's also probably an element of bias (if you didn't take the first offer, perhaps you would get a second).

...but I also don't know anyone who isn't signing the first thing that comes their way, a bird in the hand and all that when you're a young Radiation Oncologist during a pandemic in America.

 

[StIGMA]

This field is so small it's hard to talk about these things openly and not be revealing. I can say of the 3 in my class who have finished interviewing, all 3 have had >1 offer (average ~3). 2 of us are taking jobs we plan to stay in long-term and are happy with. None of us signed very first offer (despite pressure).

My advice to our junior residents is the 2024-25 classes should expect a noticeably tougher market, but this is only a prediction (and our more senior classes are super strong and will compete well despite market contraction). Problem is this crunch is already happening at less networked programs or in other regional markets. Again, good luck out there.

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

This field is so small it's hard to talk about these things openly and not be revealing. I can say of the 3 in my class who have finished interviewing, all 3 have had >1 offer (average ~3). 2 of us are taking jobs we plan to stay in long-term and are happy with. None of us signed very first offer (despite pressure).

My advice to our junior residents is the 2024-25 classes should expect a noticeably tougher market, but this is only a prediction (and our more senior classes are super strong and will compete well despite market contraction). Problem is this crunch is already happening at less networked/bottom 50% programs. Again, good luck out there.

Interesting - I sent you a PM.

 

[Neuronix]

Of course this is funny. But in all seriousness... check out any other field in medicine. Hell, check them out on SDN: "...there are innumerable high-paying opportunities once you finish residency."

That link mentions innumerable neurology jobs for 450k+ in Florida of all places. Florida rad onc is totally saturated. In rad onc you'd be lucky to get a job for 300-350k in Florida for a new/recent grad. There are people who look for years for jobs in Florida and never get anything.

 

[imhopeful432]

This field is so small it's hard to talk about these things openly and not be revealing. I can say of the 3 in my class who have finished interviewing, all 3 have had >1 offer (average ~3). 2 of us are taking jobs we plan to stay in long-term and are happy with. None of us signed very first offer (despite pressure).

My advice to our junior residents is the 2024-25 classes should expect a noticeably tougher market, but this is only a prediction (and our more senior classes are super strong and will compete well despite market contraction). Problem is this crunch is already happening at less networked/bottom 50% programs. Again, good luck out there.

Again only more anecdotes - but of the 1 person who has signed at my program and the 2 friends I've been talking to about jobs this year at other programs (all signed within past 3 weeks) - they had 3 offers, 2 offers, and 3 offers, respectively. The 2 who signed PP were both partnership track.

For those looking this year, I think the job market is slightly opening up including more academic places that previously told me they have hiring freezes early on hiring now as well.

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

Again only more anecdotes - but of the 1 person who has signed at my program and the 2 friends I've been talking to about jobs this year at other programs (all signed within past 3 weeks) - they had 3 offers, 2 offers, and 3 offers, respectively. The 2 who signed PP were both partnership track.

For those looking this year, I think the job market is slightly opening up including more academic places that previously told me they have hiring freezes early on hiring now as well.

Talking to @StIGMA over PM, I'll just say - once again, if you have geographic preferences (especially if the state touches an ocean), RadOnc is not an easy career path.

 

[yesmaster]

I don't understand the field's fixation on "top programs" as if the big 3 have magic pixie dust that can conjure up $1M/year jobs in NYC with 360 degree views of Central Park.

We all speak the same language, it's easy enough to speak to each other and discern competence and conscientiousness.

Despite the job market's weakness, both the PGY-5's in our program received 3-4 job offers apiece, with terms that compare favorably against ARRO's survey data. This is despite our program being considered by some to be "bottom 50%."

 

[RadOncDoc21]

I don't understand the field's fixation on "top programs" as if the big 3 have magic pixie dust that can conjure up $1M/year jobs in NYC with 360 degree views of Central Park.

We all speak the same language, it's easy enough to speak to each other and discern competence and conscientiousness.

Despite the job market's weakness, both the PGY-5's in our program received 3-4 job offers apiece, with terms that compare favorably against ARRO's survey data. This is despite our program being considered by some to be "bottom 50%."

 

[OTN]

I don't understand the field's fixation on "top programs" as if the big 3 have magic pixie dust that can conjure up $1M/year jobs in NYC with 360 degree views of Central Park.

We all speak the same language, it's easy enough to speak to each other and discern competence and conscientiousness.

Despite the job market's weakness, both the PGY-5's in our program received 3-4 job offers apiece, with terms that compare favorably against ARRO's survey data. This is despite our program being considered by some to be "bottom 50%."

Our group has found that one of The Big 3 does not provide as good of clinical training to their residents as one would expect. As a result, we've actively looked to other training programs when looking to fill positions. No need to go into details here, but it does go to show that residency training pedigree isn't always everything.

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

Our group has found that one of The Big 3 does not provide as good of clinical training to their residents as one would expect. As a result, we've actively looked to other training programs when looking to fill positions. No need to go into details here, but it does go to show that residency training pedigree isn't always everything.

Something I have learned over the years - sometimes, when an entire institution has national (or international) prestige, individual faculty and departments can hide behind the clout like a shield, resisting any attempts at change, improvement, or development because money and talented people will continue to come regardless.

Obviously not a problem exclusive to RadOnc - but it really leads you to question a lot of things in life.

 

[ramsesthenice]

I don't understand the field's fixation on "top programs" as if the big 3 have magic pixie dust that can conjure up $1M/year jobs in NYC with 360 degree views of Central Park.

Its not real as evidenced above. By far the people who thing pedigree matters the most are people at "top" programs. I went to a state school for undergrad and then to one of the big 5 for grad school and **** you not had a faculty member in one of my committee meetings tell me it was really remarkable that I didn't let a state education hold me back. They were not kidding.

Med school, residency, and now my faculty position...lets just say I am in no danger of getting hit by a Bentley in the parking lot and thats not an accident.

 

[frijoles]

Our group has found that one of The Big 3 does not provide as good of clinical training to their residents as one would expect. As a result, we've actively looked to other training programs when looking to fill positions. No need to go into details here, but it does go to show that residency training pedigree isn't always everything.

Our group shares the same perspective re: clinical training from probably the same program...

 

[Mandelin Rain]

I probably wouldn’t look at an MDACC grad again.

 

[Ray D. Ayshun]

I probably wouldn’t look at an MDACC grad again.

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me...you can't get fooled again."
George W Bush. Texan.

 

[ramsesthenice]

I probably wouldn’t look at an MDACC grad again.

I have had more than 1 chair tell me that outstanding med students/interns go into MDACC and average rad oncs come out.

I don’t personally know if that is fair. I have interviewed a few of their grads for faculty positions and while they all seemed pretty good clinically, their CVs have so much fluff it is hard to know what to make of anything.

 

[DoctwoB]

Again only more anecdotes - but of the 1 person who has signed at my program and the 2 friends I've been talking to about jobs this year at other programs (all signed within past 3 weeks) - they had 3 offers, 2 offers, and 3 offers, respectively. The 2 who signed PP were both partnership track.

For those looking this year, I think the job market is slightly opening up including more academic places that previously told me they have hiring freezes early on hiring now as well.

Unfortunately it’s such a hard thing to quantify, 2 offers isn’t 2 offers isn’t 2 offers.

Person A applies to most published and some unpublished openings across the country including in many locales or job types that aren’t their ideal and gets 2 offers.

Person B wants to be in San Diego and applies to 5 groups there and gets 2 offers. Same number of offers, but says something very different about the market.

Im sure the reality is somewhere in the middle (and varies for the individual) but unless there is actual unemployment it’s going to be hard to measure in hard data. Maybe job offers per practice contacted?

 

[StIGMA]

I have had more than 1 chair tell me that outstanding med students/interns go into MDACC and average rad oncs come out.

I don’t personally know if that is fair. I have interviewed a few of their grads for faculty positions and while they all seemed pretty good clinically, their CVs have so much fluff it is hard to know what to make of anything.

I thought they were speaking of HROP grads. I've spoken to some of them who hadn't done any disease-spite specific cases (eg: any GI) until PGY5 due to the way research/clinicals is structured for some of them... and due to this structure had overall weaker clinical exposure. On the other hand I've worked with awesome MDACC grads. Probably hit or miss depending on who the graduate is (person-dependent). I think both programs put out good quality rad oncs.

 

[drewdog1973]

I have had more than 1 chair tell me that outstanding med students/interns go into MDACC and average rad oncs come out.

I don’t personally know if that is fair. I have interviewed a few of their grads for faculty positions and while they all seemed pretty good clinically, their CVs have so much fluff it is hard to know what to make of anything.

You can coast at MDACC or you can take advantage of being at the "greatest cancer center" and come out a Rad Onc god. Human nature is to coast. It is not a great place for someone that doesn't have internal drive to excel**. If you're lazy, there are 3-4-5 other co-residents, rotating students, research fellows, gap year people, international grads getting their foot in the door that are eager to learn and the resources will flow to them. You think Adam Garden gives a s**t that you want to play Fortnite in the evening instead of study? No, he does not. They will move on to the next person that cares. Not only will nobody care, nobody will even notice - that's the difference compared to a medium/small program. So, I'd imagine there are quite a few grads that have not served them well and create the perception that the program is weak (real or not).

**This can be said about the majority of radonc programs, it just that those at MDACC have zero excuses to not excel. I can imagine if you hire one of the "coasters" it would really sour you on the program.

 

[ramsesthenice]

You can coast at MDACC or you can take advantage of being at the "greatest cancer center" and come out a Rad Onc god. Human nature is to coast. It is not a great place for someone that doesn't have internal drive to excel**. If you're lazy, there are 3-4-5 other co-residents, rotating students, research fellows, gap year people, international grads getting their foot in the door that are eager to learn and the resources will flow to them. You think Adam Garden gives a s**t that you want to play Fortnite in the evening instead of study? No, he does not. They will move on to the next person that cares. Not only will nobody care, nobody will even notice - that's the difference compared to a medium/small program. So, I'd imagine there are quite a few grads that have not served them well and create the perception that the program is weak (real or not).

**This can be said about the majority of radonc programs, it just that those at MDACC have zero excuses to not excel. I can imagine if you hire one of the "coasters" it would really sour you on the program.

No doubt. They have exceptionally talented staff and get very talented applicants. Great people have to come out of there. The coasting theory sounds logical and I think everyone at every residency has seen some element of that but again, I personally know very little about MDACC. My wife refused to live in Houston so I never even researched the place and, while I know a few staff, I don’t think I know any of their former grads well at all. I do know a few grads from MDACC and Harvard and they are all very good. Better than the people at I know from other kid and upper tier programs...not really. After a certain point good is good.

My personal 2 cents: up until a few years ago the quality of applicants to the top half was so good that the opportunity to be very good clinically was (and still is) there for the taking for anyone at the majority of programs. I sincerely doubt you could blindly interview a graduate from Vandy, Harvard, UNC, and Florida and pick the Harvard grad based on clinical acumen alone. Could that change as we get less and less competitive? Maybe. But I think it would take a long time for established folks in PP to believe it and magically start seeking out applicants from the big 3.

 

[Baws]

I have had more than 1 chair tell me that outstanding med students/interns go into MDACC and average rad oncs come out.

I don’t personally know if that is fair. I have interviewed a few of their grads for faculty positions and while they all seemed pretty good clinically, their CVs have so much fluff it is hard to know what to make of anything.

I’ve heard similar things about these top program grads at private practices I’ve been to, where their CV is 10 pages long but barely have experience in contouring bread and butter cases

 

[Neuronix]

My personal take is that things are very regional. "Ties to the area" seem most important in my experience. Whether that's so a practice can build a productive and equal partner or exploit someone with a huge non-compete hoping that some poor new grad won't leave due to their "ties" depends on the practice. Even churn and burn places prefer to replace people as little as possible to maximize profit and save headaches. A lot of academic places hire their own grads for main center or satellites since they are known quantities and there are "ties to the area" benefits for both sides.

If you go to a residency in a less competitive region like upper midwest, desert, southeast (outside of Florida), you will likely have more options coming out of residency in your region. They're less competitive to begin with, and then you have "ties to the area". It's hard to stand out looking for a job when every reasonable publicly advertised job gets 80+ applications, academic places get 40+ cold calls/e-mails per year, and PPs/hospital practices are getting increasing numbers of cold calls ever year since all the residents are being told to start networking early (as if that creates more jobs...). So people take you seriously when you're already in their area since they assume you're in that area for a reason and know the area to whatever extent.

More competitive regions like major metros (especially northeast, but really applies to most of them), Florida, coastal California, etc are a crapshoot. There aren't enough jobs in those areas for the people training there. It's even worse trying to break in from outside those areas.

Prestige and quality of training are unquantifiable. Some people on both the academic and private sides love to hire top tier grads, while others despise them. Big name training is probably a net positive but who knows. Also, training quality... How do you even define this? It seems to me that the most successful people are just the most friendly, competent, and work however hard they need to work for their particular practice environment. Technically are they amazing? Are they just good enough to be board certified? To me, it doesn't seem like it really matters.

 

[ramsesthenice]

Prestige and quality of training are unquantifiable.

But to some extent they can be marketable; particularly in academics. Some chairs and cancer center directors love to be able to say "Our Harvard trained scientists..."

Look, there are very clear advantages to going to top programs but they are almost exclusive to people going into academics with a very heavy research focus. A major step moving from resident/post-doc to independent faculty is the ascertainment of fellowship/career development funds and guess what a major scoring criteria for all of these grants is; successful track record of funding and publication by the mentor. People like to give money to known entities and its hard to blame them. On top of that, the top programs are comparatively flush with cash and have a lot more money available in terms of internal awards and start up packages which I can't stress enough are key to junior faculty success.

If your goal is to be a chairperson or on faculty at a top name program there is no question you would probably be well served by going to a top program. But there is equally little question that going to a top program will do very little if anything to insulate you from the realities of being in a small field with worsening market pressures. Going to a top program simply will not guarantee you a position in the city or region of your choice.

 

[w00tz]

Unfortunately it’s such a hard thing to quantify, 2 offers isn’t 2 offers isn’t 2 offers.

Person A applies to most published and some unpublished openings across the country including in many locales or job types that aren’t their ideal and gets 2 offers.

Person B wants to be in San Diego and applies to 5 groups there and gets 2 offers. Same number of offers, but says something very different about the market.

Im sure the reality is somewhere in the middle (and varies for the individual) but unless there is actual unemployment it’s going to be hard to measure in hard data. Maybe job offers per practice contacted?

Right - it's like how hard did you have to work for those two offers?

When I applied, my plan was to start looking for openings in my preferred geography and preferred practice type and if I don't get enough interviews or offers, I keep going move down my list towards the 'worst case scenario' practices that are right above my 'alternative pathway' jobs. I feel like the minimum should be 2 offers and you keep interviewing until you get at least 2. How far down the list did 2020 grads have to go? Hmmm.

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

My personal take is that things are very regional. "Ties to the area" seem most important in my experience. Whether that's so a practice can build a productive and equal partner or exploit someone with a huge non-compete hoping that some poor new grad won't leave due to their "ties" depends on the practice. Even churn and burn places prefer to replace people as little as possible to maximize profit and save headaches. A lot of academic places hire their own grads for main center or satellites since they are known quantities and there are "ties to the area" benefits for both sides.

If you go to a residency in a less competitive region like upper midwest, desert, southeast (outside of Florida), you will likely have more options coming out of residency in your region. They're less competitive to begin with, and then you have "ties to the area". It's hard to stand out looking for a job when every reasonable publicly advertised job gets 80+ applications, academic places get 40+ cold calls/e-mails per year, and PPs/hospital practices are getting increasing numbers of cold calls ever year since all the residents are being told to start networking early (as if that creates more jobs...). So people take you seriously when you're already in their area since they assume you're in that area for a reason and know the area to whatever extent.

More competitive regions like major metros (especially northeast, but really applies to most of them), Florida, coastal California, etc are a crapshoot. There aren't enough jobs in those areas for the people training there. It's even worse trying to break in from outside those areas.

Prestige and quality of training are unquantifiable. Some people on both the academic and private sides love to hire top tier grads, while others despise them. Big name training is probably a net positive but who knows. Also, training quality... How do you even define this? It seems to me that the most successful people are just the most friendly, competent, and work however hard they need to work for their particular practice environment. Technically are they amazing? Are they just good enough to be board certified? To me, it doesn't seem like it really matters.

This 100% correctly reflects my experience, and is why the other PGY-5's are reporting disparate things in this thread.

If you want to be in the Northeast (especially NYC area or New England), Coastal California, Florida, and/or a top 5-10 American city...the competition is brutal.

If you want to be in the Midwest and/or the Southeast, and ESPECIALLY if you trained in that area...your experience might be very different (in a positive direction) than mine.

Of course, this is assuming you can make it through the "weed out" basic science boards the ABR has developed.

 

[fiji128]

Got both of these recruiter text today (not a radiologist but on their list somehow). Sums up current state of affairs pretty well. No one should be taking a gamble with the next 20 to 30 years of their life and trying to enter a specialty with a job market like this and hoping that best case scenario they can get 1 to 3 job offers.

 

[CaesarRO]

Lol our med oncs still call us radiation therapists

My attendings call them chemotherapists

 

[salubalu]

My attendings call them chemotherapists

Don’t get me started on those neurosurgapists

 

[Baws]

So we interviewed and ranked an applicant this week with:

failed step 1
Failed step 2
3 Terrible MSPE comments
AND a criminal charge

Maybe there are only 100 or so radonc applicants this year who will get a job in 5 years given that employers do prefer US MDs and people without criminal charges lmao

 

[elementaryschooleconomics]

So we interviewed and ranked an applicant this week with:

failed step 1
Failed step 2
3 Terrible MSPE comments
AND a criminal charge

Maybe there are only 100 or so radonc applicants this year who will get a job in 5 years given that employers do prefer US MDs and people without criminal charges lmao

ESPECIALLY after sitting for the basic science boards this week...I have grave concerns about the people who struggled with the USMLE and their ability to get through the RadOnc gauntlet.

For the Step exams, you have literally an entire medical education industry around it, and legions of medical students making incredible free resources on top of that. Additionally, you have two years of dedicated study to prepare you specifically for Step 1.

In RadOnc...there is, in general, not much like that. There are a few programs with great in-house instruction in EITHER RadBio OR Physics (I can't think of a program which has both on staff), and there are other programs who will pay to either send their residents to the Maryland course or pay to bring someone in.

Being generous, I think less than 50% of programs have good resources for RadBio/Physics (including mythical recalls). The rest are banking on the fact that their residents can find the time and motivation to memorize textbooks. That's it. That's the entire educational plan.

So, if you struggled with Step 1 - let alone failed it - you better hope you Match into a program that actually gives you an education while also gives you a good shot at a job. Unfortunately, there are a lot of smoke and mirrors surrounding board exams on interview day, so the applicants can't actually know the truth until it's too late.

 

[drewdog1973]

So we interviewed and ranked an applicant this week with:

failed step 1
Failed step 2
3 Terrible MSPE comments
AND a criminal charge

Maybe there are only 100 or so radonc applicants this year who will get a job in 5 years given that employers do prefer US MDs and people without criminal charges lmao

Must have been very dedicated to oncology care!!

 

[RickyScott]

So we interviewed and ranked an applicant this week with:

failed step 1
Failed step 2
3 Terrible MSPE comments
AND a criminal charge

Maybe there are only 100 or so radonc applicants this year who will get a job in 5 years given that employers do prefer US MDs and people without criminal charges lmao

A real diamond in the rough is an applicant with good scores etc but one or two run ins with sexual assault, drugs etc now on the straight and narrow. I would draw the line if they are on some sort of public watch list, but that may be too conservative.

 

[medgator]

So we interviewed and ranked an applicant this week with:

failed step 1
Failed step 2
3 Terrible MSPE comments
AND a criminal charge

Maybe there are only 100 or so radonc applicants this year who will get a job in 5 years given that employers do prefer US MDs and people without criminal charges lmao

The important thing is whether he or she is fluent in English and can dictate notes... Priorities!

 

[Ray D. Ayshun]

So we interviewed and ranked an applicant this week with:

failed step 1
Failed step 2
3 Terrible MSPE comments
AND a criminal charge

Maybe there are only 100 or so radonc applicants this year who will get a job in 5 years given that employers do prefer US MDs and people without criminal charges lmao

I've said this before. Ranking applicants that will be dead or in prison in 5 years is the right thing to do for the health of the field. Contracting is one method. This is another. Nice work.

 

[dieABRdie]

So we interviewed and ranked an applicant this week with:

failed step 1
Failed step 2
3 Terrible MSPE comments
AND a criminal charge

Maybe there are only 100 or so radonc applicants this year who will get a job in 5 years given that employers do prefer US MDs and people without criminal charges lmao

Oh please do tell the criminal charge......

 

[dieABRdie]

ESPECIALLY after sitting for the basic science boards this week...I have grave concerns about the people who struggled with the USMLE and their ability to get through the RadOnc gauntlet.

For the Step exams, you have literally an entire medical education industry around it, and legions of medical students making incredible free resources on top of that. Additionally, you have two years of dedicated study to prepare you specifically for Step 1.

In RadOnc...there is, in general, not much like that. There are a few programs with great in-house instruction in EITHER RadBio OR Physics (I can't think of a program which has both on staff), and there are other programs who will pay to either send their residents to the Maryland course or pay to bring someone in.

Being generous, I think less than 50% of programs have good resources for RadBio/Physics (including mythical recalls). The rest are banking on the fact that their residents can find the time and motivation to memorize textbooks. That's it. That's the entire educational plan.

So, if you struggled with Step 1 - let alone failed it - you better hope you Match into a program that actually gives you an education while also gives you a good shot at a job. Unfortunately, there are a lot of smoke and mirrors surrounding board exams on interview day, so the applicants can't actually know the truth until it's too late.

I know we keep complaining for them to change the board cert process but I really hope they keep it just how it is. They'll get what's coming....

 

[thecarbonionangle]

So we interviewed and ranked an applicant this week with:

failed step 1
Failed step 2
3 Terrible MSPE comments
AND a criminal charge

Maybe there are only 100 or so radonc applicants this year who will get a job in 5 years given that employers do prefer US MDs and people without criminal charges lmao

Yup i am hearing this too from other programs. These people will match this year. The breadlines are coming.