OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to assess the experiences and preferences of radiology residents with respect to breast imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We surveyed radiology residents at 26 programs in New York and New Jersey. Survey topics included plans for subspecialty training, beliefs, and attitudes toward breast imaging and breast cancer screening and the likelihood of interpreting mammography in the future. RESULTS: Three hundred forty-four residents completed the survey (response rate, 62%). The length of time spent training in breast imaging varied from no dedicated time (37%) to 1-8 weeks (40%) to more than 9 weeks (23%). Most respondents (97%) agreed that mammography is important to women's health. More than 85% of residents believed that mammography should be interpreted by breast imaging specialists. Respondents shared negative views about mammography, agreeing with statements that the field was associated with a high risk of malpractice (99%), stress (94%), and low reimbursement (68%). Respondents endorsed several positive attributes of mammography, including job availability (97%), flexible work schedules (94%), and few calls or emergencies (93%). Most radiology residents (93%) said that they were likely to pursue subspecialty training, and 7% expressed interest in breast imaging fellowships. CONCLUSION: Radiology residents' negative and positive views about mammography seem to be independent of time spent training in mammography and of future plans to pursue fellowship training in breast imaging. Systematic assessment of the plans and preferences of radiology residents can facilitate the development of strategies to attract trainees to careers in breast imaging.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to assess the experiences and preferences of radiology residents with respect to breast imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We surveyed radiology residents at 26 programs in New York and New Jersey. Survey topics included plans for subspecialty training, beliefs, and attitudes toward breast imaging and breast cancer screening and the likelihood of interpreting mammography in the future. RESULTS: Three hundred forty-four residents completed the survey (response rate, 62%). The length of time spent training in breast imaging varied from no dedicated time (37%) to 1-8 weeks (40%) to more than 9 weeks (23%). Most respondents (97%) agreed that mammography is important to women's health. More than 85% of residents believed that mammography should be interpreted by breast imaging specialists. Respondents shared negative views about mammography, agreeing with statements that the field was associated with a high risk of malpractice (99%), stress (94%), and low reimbursement (68%). Respondents endorsed several positive attributes of mammography, including job availability (97%), flexible work schedules (94%), and few calls or emergencies (93%). Most radiology residents (93%) said that they were likely to pursue subspecialty training, and 7% expressed interest in breast imaging fellowships. CONCLUSION: Radiology residents' negative and positive views about mammography seem to be independent of time spent training in mammography and of future plans to pursue fellowship training in breast imaging. Systematic assessment of the plans and preferences of radiology residents can facilitate the development of strategies to attract trainees to careers in breast imaging.
Authors: Lawrence W Bassett; Barbara S Monsees; Robert A Smith; Lily Wang; Parizad Hooshi; Dione M Farria; James W Sayre; Stephen A Feig; Valerie P Jackson Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-05-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: L Tabár; C J Fagerberg; A Gad; L Baldetorp; L H Holmberg; O Gröntoft; U Ljungquist; B Lundström; J C Månson; G Eklund Journal: Lancet Date: 1985-04-13 Impact factor: 79.321