Literature DB >> 32798607

Recruitment Challenges and Opportunities for Radiation Oncology Residency Programs During the 2020-2021 Virtual Residency Match.

Bismarck Odei1, Emma Brey Holliday2, Reshma Jagsi3, Fumiko Chino4, Cole Schulmire5, Mahesh Kudrimoti6, Allen M Chen7, Raju Raval8, Denise Fabian6.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32798607      PMCID: PMC7424314          DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.08.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


× No keyword cloud information.
Over the last few years, multiple radiation oncology (RO) residency programs have been unsuccessful in filling all spots during the main National Resident Match Program process.1, 2, 3 For example, in 2019, the unmatched rate was 14.5%, which was substantially higher than the average rate of 2.5% over the last 8 years. This recent development in RO has been partially attributed to concerns about an oversupply of graduating RO residents. The 2020-2021 RO National Resident Match Program presents an added challenge to the Match: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed unprecedented limitations on the usual instruments of recruitment, such as away rotations and in-person residency interviews. In the current climate, a successful recruitment strategy requires an effective online presence for informing and engaging future applicants. In this study, we assessed the online presence of RO residency programs participating in the 2020-2021 residency Match. Between June 9 and July 6, 2020, we searched for Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube accounts of RO residency programs or RO departments. We also sent a survey to residency programs regarding plans for creating a virtual away rotation (VAR) experience this year. Finally, RO residency websites were evaluated for the presence of key features pertinent to perspective residents. We identified 91 RO residency programs. Our survey on VARs yielded a response rate of 71% (65 of 91). Of the 65 responding programs, 21 (32%) planned VARs, 10 (15%) were exploring the possibility, and 34 (53%) were not considering VARs. A minority of programs had active social media accounts highlighting resident activities, ongoing research, or initiatives in the department. Although the majority had departmental websites highlighting facilities, research, and curriculum, few included key information such as why residents chose a particular residency program, accolades of current residents, or the employment locations of alumni (Table 1 ). In summary, utilization of and engagement on social media platforms are low, websites are missing key details germane to prospective residents, and a minority of programs are planning VARs for the upcoming academic year.
Table 1

Online presence of radiation oncology residency programs

Active social media accountsNo. (%) of programs with accountsSocial media account activity
Twitter27 (30%)Median followers 402 (range, 0-1280)Median tweets 112 (range, 0-1181)
Instagram7 (8%)Median posts 21 (range, 3-316)
Facebook4 (4%)Median multimedia posts 463 (range, 159-706)
YouTube2 (2%)Median videos 1 (range, 1-1)

“Active” was defined as accounts that provided meaningful content, which was defined as information that highlighted resident activities, ongoing research, or initiatives in the department.

Online presence of radiation oncology residency programs “Active” was defined as accounts that provided meaningful content, which was defined as information that highlighted resident activities, ongoing research, or initiatives in the department. It is important to note that although the current concerns of workforce disequilibrium in RO are valid, ongoing efforts to recruit strong candidates remain essential to maintaining the vitality of the RO specialty, while still formulating a sustainable solution for the challenges of the current labor market. Consequently, for RO program directors, the goal of the 2020-2021 Match continues to be to successfully recruit the most highly qualified, passionate, and motivated candidates. In prior years, RO away rotations have accounted for 28% of residency matches, with home rotations facilitating another 24% of matches. For the upcoming cycle, the COVID-19 pandemic has thrown these traditional recruitment practices into disarray, which underscores the importance of cultivating an effective online presence to highlight the strengths of a residency program. This may be particularly important for small to medium-sized residency programs without “brand recognition.” Additionally, VARs may prove to be essential to maintaining a talented and diverse pool of candidates for the field, particularly those from groups historically underrepresented in medicine or from schools without a home RO program. Barriers to creating a successful VAR are many, but the Radiation Oncology Virtual Education Rotation initiative, a virtual RO rotation by the RO departments of Stanford University and Oregon Health and Science University, may provide a blueprint to guide other residency programs exploring ways to implement virtual initiatives. Although this year’s residency match process presents several challenges, opportunities nevertheless abound for innovative and novel recruitment strategies. Engaging applicants and disseminating critical information to candidates via social media platforms and other online platforms can provide RO residency programs with the means to present themselves effectively. We call on RO residency programs to explore these strategies to increase their reach and chances of success in the upcoming Match process and to ensure the vitality and diversity of the pipeline of talent in our field.
  5 in total

1.  The High Number of Unfilled Positions in the 2019 Radiation Oncology Residency Match: Temporary Variation or Indicator of Important Change?

Authors:  James E Bates; Robert J Amdur; W Robert Lee
Journal:  Pract Radiat Oncol       Date:  2019-05-15

2.  Value of Elective Radiation Oncology Rotations: How Many Is Too Many?

Authors:  Samuel Jang; Stephen A Rosenberg; Craig Hullet; Kristin A Bradley; Randall J Kimple
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2017-11-06       Impact factor: 7.038

3.  Unfilled Positions in the 2020 Radiation Oncology Residency Match: No Longer an Isolated Event.

Authors:  James E Bates; Robert J Amdur; W Robert Lee
Journal:  Pract Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-05-16

4.  Unfilled Positions in the 2019 National Resident Matching Program Radiation Oncology Match and Supplemental Offer and Acceptance Program.

Authors:  Ankit Agarwal; Trevor J Royce; Chelain R Goodman; Mudit Chowdhary
Journal:  Pract Radiat Oncol       Date:  2019-11

5.  Continuing Medical Student Education During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: Development of a Virtual Radiation Oncology Clerkship.

Authors:  Erqi L Pollom; Navjot Sandhu; Jessica Frank; Jacob A Miller; Jean-Pierre Obeid; Noah Kastelowitz; Neil Panjwani; Scott G Soltys; Hilary P Bagshaw; Sarah S Donaldson; Kathleen Horst; Beth M Beadle; Daniel T Chang; Iris Gibbs
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-05-20
  5 in total
  1 in total

1.  In Regard to Odei et al.

Authors:  Jenna M Kahn; Navjot Sandhu; Erqi L Pollom
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2021-02-01       Impact factor: 7.038

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.