-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
2022-02-22_12-00-18_sylwl9_cg.html
68 lines (68 loc) · 8.81 KB
/
2022-02-22_12-00-18_sylwl9_cg.html
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
<html>
<head>
<title>[Training Tuesday] - Weekly thread for questions about grad school, residency, and general career topics 02/22/2022</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>[Training Tuesday] - Weekly thread for questions about grad school, residency, and general career topics 02/22/2022</h1>
<p>This is the place to ask questions about graduate school, training programs, or general basic career topics. If the user is just learning about the field and wants to know if it is something they should explore, this thread is probably the correct place for those first few questions on their mind.</p>
<h2>Examples:</h2>
<ul>
<li>"I majored in Surf Science and Technology in undergrad, is Medical Physics right for me?"</li>
<li>"I can't decide between Biomedical Engineering and Medical Physics..."</li>
<li>"Do Medical Physicists get free CT scans for life?"</li>
<li>"Masters vs. PhD"</li>
<li>"How do I prepare for Residency interviews?"</li>
</ul>
<h2>Comments:</h2>
<ol>
<li>
<p><strong>Comment 1:</strong> The user is going to be applying for medical physics grad school this fall, they recently became interested in the field and they don’t really have research experience. They are a physics major going for an NRE minor (closest thing to medical physics there). Are they okay with a lack of research experience? They want to go into radiation therapy mainly.</p>
<ol>
<li><strong>Response 1:</strong> Lack of research experience will certainly be a problem for PhD programs. Are they applying to masters?</li>
<li><strong>Response 2:</strong> Yeah. Their current school only offers a masters and they need a masters for radiation therapy as far as they know, so their plan is to go for masters and then a PhD later down the line.</li>
<li><strong>Response 3:</strong> Having a masters would definitely help, especially if they publish with their thesis research. It looks like they go to Georgia Tech; they definitely have a PhD in medical physics (the responder is in the DL masters right now).</li>
<li><strong>Response 4:</strong> Ah okay, they must have missed it. Thank you.</li>
</ol>
</li>
<li>
<p><strong>Comment 2:</strong> The user asks if taking some courses like Radiation Physics and Radiation Protection as an undergraduate student with some hours of medical physics job shadowing help to improve their application for applying to MS graduate programs.</p>
<ol>
<li><strong>Response 1:</strong> For sure it would be good to have, although the exact electives they take may not matter as much as their grades in said electives. They'll get plenty of radiation physics and protection in a CAMPEP program, so they shouldn't worry about getting a "leg up" if they get the responder's drift.</li>
</ol>
</li>
<li>
<p><strong>Comment 3:</strong> The user asks if CAMPEP accredited certification programs are a realistic way for entry into medical physics in North America. They wonder if they would be able to compete with Medical Physics PhDs for residencies. They have been accepted to two PhDs (Geophysics and Medical Biophysics) and they like both fields equally. They are considering starting a PhD in Geophysics and having the certification program as a backup, but only if the certification makes them competitive for residencies and later on, hospital positions.</p>
<ol>
<li><strong>Response 1:</strong> Certificates for PhDs in fields other than MP is certainly realistic - plenty of people do it. The responder is a masters student with a few certificate classmates. Their department has current and past residents who did the certificate. During this residency interview season, they've met several residents at prospective programs that were certificate students.</li>
<li><strong>Response 2:</strong> As far as being a backup option, if it does end up being the case that they discover geophysics is not for them and they do a certificate, by the time of residency application, they should have a better narrative that describes why/how they switched to medical physics and want clinical training. Some residencies themselves have mentioned that they want indications that the user is really interested in being a clinical medical physicist through things like shadowing, assisting in clinic, and clinical projects.</li>
<li><strong>Response 3:</strong> The responder's classmates who are doing a certificate have all done it part-time over at least two years while working day jobs as researchers, mostly postdocs in rad onc. This seems like a good option since they get research experience in medical physics, have a bit more time to do clinical stuff, and they get tuition benefits as school employees.</li>
<li><strong>Response 4:</strong> The user should also consider the opportunity cost of going directly into a certificate route compared to a CAMPEP degree - they would be delaying getting to a qualified medical physicist salary by a year or so. But that's secondary if they're truly on the fence about which field they want right now.</li>
</ol>
</li>
<li>
<p><strong>Comment 4:</strong> The user asks if a new model will be seen with the bottleneck currently in place. They want to know approximately how many open positions there are in the US and if the current state of ABR/CAMPEP/Residency prevents these positions from being filled in a timely manner. They wonder if these positions can't be filled adequately, does that change or will it change the current model for staffing, such as more remote work, physicist assistants, and automation.</p>
<ol>
<li><strong>Response 1:</strong> The responder works for a healthcare staffing agency and recently saw a job posting come through for a medical physicist (6 month contract position). Normally, facilities will only utilize hiring agencies when they are having trouble filling the position, so it would seem like the need is there.</li>
</ol>
</li>
<li>
<p><strong>Comment 5:</strong> The user mentions that they have a MS in physics and have been discouraged by what it would take to become board certified. They would need another masters degree in MP, plus a residency where most programs accept just 1 applicant a year.</p>
<ol>
<li><strong>Response 1:</strong> The responder mentions that the bottleneck is to the user's benefit. They ask if the user would rather be able to easily get a residency position but struggle to find employment afterwards, when they are more specialized and have already committed more years of their life to a profession in which they are not competitive. They also ask if the user wants there to be so many candidates that employers feel no pressure to offer good working conditions or competitive salaries.</li>
<li><strong>Response 2:</strong> The responder agrees with moving the bottleneck to the graduate degree. They find it totally ridiculous to be in a scenario where there is a strong possibility of wasting 2 years and $100k on a masters degree when the user could have been starting a career in another field.</li>
<li><strong>Response 3:</strong> The responder mentions that academic physicists are not a valid comparison. There are very few industry positions for theoretical physics, and most people do it because it is their passion and not for the promise of a good career. If the bottleneck were to be removed, medical physicists would be more similar to highly paid pharmacists or engineers without a hard bottleneck in hiring. Less qualified candidates would become certified junior medical physicists for cheap and be able to move up over time.</li>
<li><strong>Response 4:</strong> The responder adds that medical physicists are not overpaid that much compared to American physicians. In general, average physicists make about half of what an average radiation oncologist makes. This trend follows in at least a few major countries where the responder looked it up.</li>
<li><strong>Response 5:</strong> The responder agrees that the shortage across the board for clinical physicists will continue if the bottleneck persists. They mention that administrators will have to consider other alternatives to combat the lack of applicants with the same or greater census/workload.</li>
</ol>
</li>
<li>
<p><strong>Comment 6:</strong> The user asks if the shortage of clinical physicists will continue if the bottleneck persists, and if so, administrators will have to consider other alternatives to combat the lack of applicants with the same or greater census/workload.</p>
<ol>
<li><strong>Response 1:</strong> The responder asks what type of positions the user is talking about - residency positions or general medical physics jobs available post-bottleneck.</li>
<li><strong>Response 2:</strong> The user clarifies that they are referring to general medical physics jobs available post-bottleneck.</li>
</ol>
</li>
</ol>
<p>Original URL: <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/MedicalPhysics/comments/sylwl9/training_tuesday_weekly_thread_for_questions/">https://www.reddit.com/r/MedicalPhysics/comments/sylwl9/training_tuesday_weekly_thread_for_questions/</a></p>
</body>
</html>