PURPOSE: To evaluate trends in the geographic distribution of the radiation oncology (RO) workforce. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We used the 1995 and 2007 versions of the Area Resource File to map the ratio of RO to the population aged 65 years or older (ROR) within different health service areas (HSA) within the United States. We used regression analysis to find associations between population variables and 2007 ROR. We calculated Gini coefficients for ROR to assess the evenness of RO distribution and compared that with primary care physicians and total physicians. RESULTS: There was a 24% increase in the RO workforce from 1995 to 2007. The overall growth in the RO workforce was less than that of primary care or the overall physician workforce. The mean ROR among HSAs increased by more than one radiation oncologist per 100,000 people aged 65 years or older, from 5.08 per 100,000 to 6.16 per 100,000. However, there remained consistent geographic variability concerning RO distribution, specifically affecting the non-metropolitan HSAs. Regression analysis found higher ROR in HSAs that possessed higher education (p = 0.001), higher income (p < 0.001), lower unemployment rates (p < 0.001), and higher minority population (p = 0.022). Gini coefficients showed RO distribution less even than for both primary care physicians and total physicians (0.326 compared with 0.196 and 0.292, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a modest growth in the RO workforce, there exists persistent geographic maldistribution of radiation oncologists allocated along socioeconomic and racial lines. To solve problems surrounding the RO workforce, issues concerning both gross numbers and geographic distribution must be addressed. Copyright Â
PURPOSE: To evaluate trends in the geographic distribution of the radiation oncology (RO) workforce. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We used the 1995 and 2007 versions of the Area Resource File to map the ratio of RO to the population aged 65 years or older (ROR) within different health service areas (HSA) within the United States. We used regression analysis to find associations between population variables and 2007 ROR. We calculated Gini coefficients for ROR to assess the evenness of RO distribution and compared that with primary care physicians and total physicians. RESULTS: There was a 24% increase in the RO workforce from 1995 to 2007. The overall growth in the RO workforce was less than that of primary care or the overall physician workforce. The mean ROR among HSAs increased by more than one radiation oncologist per 100,000 people aged 65 years or older, from 5.08 per 100,000 to 6.16 per 100,000. However, there remained consistent geographic variability concerning RO distribution, specifically affecting the non-metropolitan HSAs. Regression analysis found higher ROR in HSAs that possessed higher education (p = 0.001), higher income (p < 0.001), lower unemployment rates (p < 0.001), and higher minority population (p = 0.022). Gini coefficients showed RO distribution less even than for both primary care physicians and total physicians (0.326 compared with 0.196 and 0.292, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a modest growth in the RO workforce, there exists persistent geographic maldistribution of radiation oncologists allocated along socioeconomic and racial lines. To solve problems surrounding the RO workforce, issues concerning both gross numbers and geographic distribution must be addressed. Copyright Â
Authors: Marcia M Ward; Fred Ullrich; Kevin Matthews; Gerard Rushton; Roger Tracy; Michael A Goldstein; Dean F Bajorin; Michael P Kosty; Suanna S Bruinooge; Amy Hanley; Geraldine M Jacobson; Charles F Lynch Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Mudit Chowdhary; Jeffrey M Switchenko; Neilayan Sen; Arpit M Chhabra; Leah M Katz; Naresh K Jegadeesh; Parul N Barry; Dian Wang; Trevor J Royce; Walter J Curran; Neha Vapiwala; Lynn D Wilson; Ross A Abrams; Gaurav Marwaha; Kirtesh R Patel Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2018-12-21 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Mudit Chowdhary; Arpit M Chhabra; Jeffrey M Switchenko; Jaymin Jhaveri; Neilayan Sen; Pretesh R Patel; Walter J Curran; Ross A Abrams; Kirtesh R Patel; Gaurav Marwaha Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2017-04-24 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Aaron J Feinstein; Pamela R Soulos; Jessica B Long; Jeph Herrin; Kenneth B Roberts; James B Yu; Cary P Gross Journal: Med Care Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Chun Chieh Lin; Suanna S Bruinooge; M Kelsey Kirkwood; Dawn L Hershman; Ahmedin Jemal; B Ashleigh Guadagnolo; James B Yu; Shane Hopkins; Michael Goldstein; Dean Bajorin; Sharon H Giordano; Michael Kosty; Anna Arnone; Amy Hanley; Stephanie Stevens; Christine Olsen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-12-17 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Alexander Morzycki; Helene Retrouvey; Becher Alhalabi; Johnny Ionut Efanov; Sarah Al-Youha; Jamil Ahmad; David T Tang Journal: Plast Surg (Oakv) Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 0.947
Authors: Sudeep K Siddappa Malleshappa; Smith Giri; Smit Patel; Tapan Mehta; Leonard Appleman; Scott F Huntington; Vida Passero; Rahul A Parikh; Kathan D Mehta Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-05-12 Impact factor: 3.240