Surveying Fourth-Year Medical Students Regarding the Choice of Diagnostic Radiology as a Specialty

PurposeThe aim of this study was to survey fourth-year medical students, both those choosing and those not choosing diagnostic radiology as their specialty, regarding factors influencing their choice of specialty and their perceptions of radiology.MethodsA voluntary anonymous online survey hyperlink was sent to 141 US medical schools for distribution to fourth-year students. Topics included demographics, radiology education, specialty choice and influencing factors, and opinions of radiology.ResultsA representative sampling (7%) of 2015 fourth-year medical students (n = 1,219; 51% men, 49% women) participated: 7% were applying in radiology and 93% were not. For respondents applying in radiology, the most important factor was intellectual challenge. For respondents applying in nonradiology specialties, degree of patient contact was the most important factor in the decision not to choose radiology; job market was not listed as a top-three factor. Women were less likely than men to apply in radiology (P < .001), with radiology selected by 11.8% of men (56 of 476) and only 2.8% of women (13 of 459). Respondents self-identifying as Asian had a significantly higher (P = .015) likelihood of selecting radiology (19 of 156 [12.2%]) than all other races combined (44 of 723 [6.1%]). Respondents at medical schools with required dedicated medical imaging rotations were more likely to choose radiology as a specialty, but most schools still do not require the clerkship (82%).ConclusionsThe reasons fourth-year medical students choose, or do not choose, diagnostic radiology as a specialty are multifactorial, but noncontrollable factors, such as the job market, proved less compelling than controllable factors, such as taking a radiology rotation.     

Hidden Curriculum and the Demographic Stoicism That Keeps Women and Minorities Away From Radiology: A Mixed-Methods Study of Medical Students

ObjectiveTo understand how women and historically underrepresented minority medical students perceive radiology as a potential career choice.MethodsMedical students representing a broad spectrum of radiology exposure from a single institution were invited to participate in a mixed-methods study. Participants completed a 16-item survey about demographics and perceptions of radiology. Ten focus groups were administered to probe decision making regarding career selection. The themes influencing women and historically underrepresented minority students are presented.ResultsForty-nine medical students, including 29 (59%) women and 17 (35%) underrepresented minorities, participated. Most participants (28 of 48, 58%) reported men outnumbered women in radiology. Female participants reported a lack of mentorship and role models as major concerns. Outreach efforts focused on the family-friendly nature of radiology were viewed as patronizing. Demographic improvements in the field were viewed as very slow. Forty-six percent (22 of 48) of participants indicated that radiology had a less underrepresented racial or ethnic workforce than other medical specialties. Minority participants especially noted a lack of radiology presence in mainstream media, so students have few preconceived biases. A failure to organically connect with the mostly White male radiologists because of a lack of shared background was a major barrier. Finally, participants described a hidden curriculum that pushes minority medical students away from specialty fields like radiology and toward primary care fields to address underserved communities and health care disparities.DiscussionWomen and historically underrepresented minority medical students perceive major barriers to choosing a career in radiology. Radiology departments must develop sophisticated multilevel approaches to improve diversity.     

Assessing Medical Students’ Knowledge of IR at Two American Medical Schools

PurposeTo determine if there was a difference in the level of knowledge about interventional radiology (IR) between medical students in preclinical years of training compared with medical students in clinical years of training at two medical schools and to compare awareness of IR based on the curriculum at each school: one with required radiology education and one without such a requirement.Materials and MethodsAn anonymous survey was distributed to students at two medical schools; the survey assessed knowledge of IR, knowledge of training pathways, and preferred methods to increase exposure. Responses of the preclinical and clinical groups were compared, and responses from the clinical groups at each school were compared.Results“Poor” or “fair” knowledge of IR was reported by 84% (n = 217 of 259) of preclinical students compared with 62% of clinical students (n = 110 of 177; P < .001). IR was being considered as a career by 11% of all students (15%, n = 40 of 259 preclinical; 5%, n = 9 of 177 clinical). The main reason respondents were not considering IR was “lack of knowledge” (65%, n = 136 of 210 preclinical; 20%, n = 32 of 162 clinical). Students in the clinical group at the institution with a required radiology rotation reported significantly better knowledge of IR than clinical students from the institution without a required clerkship (P = .017).ConclusionsThere are significant differences in knowledge of IR between preclinical and clinical students. Required radiology education in the clinical years does increase awareness of IR.     

Institutional Interventional Radiology Symposium Increases Medical Student Interest and Identifies Target Recruitment Candidates

ObjectivesTo assess and raise medical student interest in interventional radiology (IR); and to evaluate student response across gender, level of training, and surgical vs nonsurgical specialty interest.Materials and MethodsAll Ohio medical students were invited to an IR Symposium held by a large academic medical center in central Ohio. The program encompassed didactic lectures, hands-on simulation models, and a networking luncheon with faculty, trainees, and industry partners. All attendees completed an anonymous, 5-point Likert scaled survey preattending and postattending the event to assess their awareness of IR as a specialty, understanding of the current training pathways, and level of interest.ResultsA total of 46 participants (M:F 60%:40%, MS1—53%, MS2—36%, and MS3—11%) attended the symposium. The cohort demonstrated increased interest in pursuing a career in IR following the symposium (4.12 vs 3.70, P < 0.001). Students with an interest in a nonsurgical specialty showed an increased interest in IR (4.20 vs 3.68, P < 0.001), whereas surgically oriented students did not demonstrate a significant increase (4.00 vs 3.71, P = 0.375). No statistically significant differences were noted across gender or level of training. The symposium experience significantly increased understanding of the IR training pathways (4.51 vs 2.94, P < 0.001). Students rated lectures (57%) and endovascular simulators (41%) as the most useful experiences.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated the role of symposia in improving medical student awareness of IR and training pathways. Findings were validated across gender and training level, and identified the subset of students with nonsurgical interests as most responsive to such intervention and potential recruitment.     

Increasing Medical Student Exposure to IR through Integration of IR into the Gross Anatomy Course

Purpose

To compare medical student knowledge of and interest in interventional radiology (IR) before and after the integration of an IR lecture series within the gross anatomy course.

The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Diagnostic Radiology: A Survey at a Single Radiology Residency Training Program

PurposeAdvances in artificial intelligence applied to diagnostic radiology are predicted to have a major impact on this medical specialty. With the goal of establishing a baseline upon which to build educational activities on this topic, a survey was conducted among trainees and attending radiologists at a single residency program.MethodsAn anonymous questionnaire was distributed. Comparisons of categorical data between groups (trainees and attending radiologists) were made using Pearson χ² analysis or an exact analysis when required. Comparisons were made using the Wilcoxon rank sum test when the data were not normally distributed. An α level of 0.05 was used.ResultsThe overall response rate was 66% (69 of 104). Thirty-six percent of participants (n = 25) reported not having read a scientific medical article on the topic of artificial intelligence during the past 12 months. Twenty-nine percent of respondents (n = 12) reported using artificial intelligence tools during their daily work. Trainees were more likely to express doubts on whether they would have pursued diagnostic radiology as a career had they known of the potential impact artificial intelligence is predicted to have on the specialty (P = .0254) and were also more likely to plan to learn about the topic (P = .0401).ConclusionsRadiologists lack exposure to current scientific medical articles on artificial intelligence. Trainees are concerned by the implications artificial intelligence may have on their jobs and desire to learn about the topic. There is a need to develop educational resources to help radiologists assume an active role in guiding and facilitating the development and implementation of artificial intelligence tools in diagnostic radiology.     

Impact of a Virtual Introduction to Radiation Oncology Presentation on Stimulating Interest in the Specialty Among Diverse Medical Students at Multiple Institutions

PurposeMany US medical students lack access to radiation oncology (RO). The authors’ hypothesis was that a virtual, cross-institutional presentation introducing students to a career in RO would be valuable in exposing students to RO who are less likely to access it otherwise and would increase students’ interest in a career in RO regardless of their gender, race, or ethnicity.MethodsA 1-hour, live, virtual, extracurricular presentation was offered to deans of US medical schools lacking affiliated RO departments and/or having high enrollments of students underrepresented in medicine (UIM) and also student groups composed primarily of UIM students. Presentations were given individually to each school by a single radiation oncologist. An electronic survey captured data from participating students.ResultsOne hundred ninety-seven students from 13 institutions attended presentations; 114 students responded to the survey (response rate, 58%). Ninety-two students (81%) were aware of the specialty of RO before the presentation; however, UIM students were significantly less likely to be aware of RO than all others (69% versus 87%, P = .05). Only 19 students (17%) reported previously hearing presentations from radiation oncologist (29% among second- to fourth-year students versus 9% among first-year students, P = .01). Ninety-eight students (86%) expressed more interest in pursuing a career in RO after the presentation. There was no significant difference in interest in RO for any demographic subgroups.ConclusionsVirtual RO exposure was feasible to deliver to students less likely to be exposed otherwise and successfully stimulated interest in the specialty regardless of students’ gender, race, or ethnicity.     

The Stability of Factors Influencing the Choice of Medical Specialty Among Medical Students and Postgraduate Radiology Trainees

ObjectiveTo investigate whether general psychological motivating factors that guide career selection of a medical specialty differ over the course of medical school and to compare differences in motivating factors among students choosing “controllable” lifestyle specialties, students choosing “uncontrollable” lifestyle specialties, and a cohort of radiology residents.Materials and MethodsAn anonymous survey was distributed to first- through fourth-year medical students and radiology residents at a single institution. Participants were asked to select their top three of seven factors that most influenced their choice of medical specialty. Fourth-year students were asked to designate the specialty to which they had applied.ResultsThe survey was distributed to 259 students and 47 radiology residents with a response rate of 93.8% (243 of 259) and 95.7% (45 of 47), respectively. The top three factors indicated by medical students were finding the daily work fulfilling, work–life balance, and interest in the subject. These top three factors were common to all medical student classes and did not differ between students choosing “controllable” versus “uncontrollable” fields. The factors uncommonly selected were similar personality to others in the field, attending income, competitiveness or prestige, and job market conditions. For radiology residents, the top three motivating factors were the same as for medical students.ConclusionThree out of seven motivating factors were universally important to trainees, regardless of their stage of medical training or their selection of a controllable versus uncontrollable lifestyle specialty. These data suggest the variety of career choices made by students may not derive from differing underlying values.     

Longitudinal Resilience and Burnout in Radiology Residents

PurposeThe aims of this study were to determine resilience levels of radiology residents at the start of radiology residency, investigate changes in resilience and burnout during residency, and assess the relationship between resilience and burnout among radiology residents.MethodsDiagnostic radiology residents were invited to participate in online surveys from 2016 to 2019. Resilience was assessed using the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale. Burnout was assessed using the Maslach Burnout Inventory–Human Services Survey. For each data set, genders’ scores were compared using either analysis of variance or Kruskal–Wallis tests. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to explore the correlations between resilience and burnout.ResultsWomen and men had no statistically significant difference among baseline resilience scores (P = .78). However, there was a statistically significant overall decrease in resilience scores among women (P = .002). Baseline Maslach Burnout Inventory–Human Services Survey scores indicated that residents began residency without frequent symptoms of burnout. There was no statistically significant temporal change across subjects among burnout scores in any scale (P ≥ .09 for all) or between women and men (P ≥ .37 for all interactions). However, among women, there was a statistically significant difference in depersonalization scores during training (P = .009). Additionally, higher resilience scores were associated with a greater sense of personal achievement (r = .52) and less emotional exhaustion (r = −.56) and depersonalization (r = −.59).ConclusionsThe results of this study demonstrate that gender differences in resilience and burnout occur during radiology residency and that resilience has a protective effect against experiencing symptoms of burnout. Radiology residency programs should consider building longitudinal resilience for all trainees, especially women.     

Trends in Gender and Racial Profiles of US Academic Radiology Faculty

ObjectiveTo evaluate gender and racial profiles of US academic radiology faculty.Materials and MethodsThis is a retrospective analysis of the American Association of Medical College database of radiology faculty members from 2006 to 2017 by academic rank, chair position, race or ethnicity, and gender. The data were described with annual proportions and average annual counts and fit to a Poisson regression model. Comparison data were taken from American Association of Medical College on matriculants at US medical schools and from ACGME on radiology residents.ResultsWomen increased significantly in the ranks of professor by 4.5%, associate professor by 4.8%, and assistant professor by 4.8% (P < .05). Asian and multiple race non-Hispanic radiologists increased in the rank of professor by 5.9% and 3.1%, respectively (P < .05). Among department chairs, only women and Asian faculty increased by 6.4% and 7.5%, respectively (P < .05). The proportion of women chairs increased from 10.0% (19 of 191) in 2006 to 17.4% (39 of 224) in 2017. Black and Hispanic chairs collectively represented less than 10% of the total chairs every year.DiscussionThe significant percent annual increase in women faculty in academic ranks and chair positions suggests that the radiology faculty is becoming more diverse. However, the decreasing proportion of women with increasing academic ranks within each year of the study period suggests attrition or lack of promotion of women radiology faculty. The disparity in black and Hispanic faculty members and chairs suggests that emphasis should continue to be placed on tailored recruitment.     

The State of Medical Student Teaching of Interventional Radiology: Implications for the Future

IntroductionThe formation of integrated interventional radiology (IR) residency programs has changed the training paradigm. This change mandates the need to provide adequate exposure to allow students to explore IR as a career option and to allow programs to sufficiently evaluate students. This study aims to highlight the availability of medical student education in IR and proposes a basic framework for clinical rotations.Materials and MethodsThe Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) website was utilized to generate a list of accredited medical schools in the United States. School websites and course listings were searched for availability of IR and diagnostic radiology rotations. The curricula of several well-established IR rotations were examined to identify and categorize course content.ResultsIn all, 140 LCME-accredited medical schools had course information available. Of those schools, 70.5% offered an IR rotation; 84.6% were only available to senior medical students and only 2% were offered for preclinical students; and 8.1% of courses were listed as subinternships. Well-established IR clerkships included a variety of clinical settings, including preprocedure evaluation, experience performing procedures, postprocedure management, and discharge planning.ConclusionMedical student exposure to IR is crucial to the success of integrated IR residency programs. Current research shows few institutions with formal IR subinternship rotations. Although 70.5% of institutions have some form of nonstandardized IR course, 84.6% are available only to fourth-year students, and 2% are offered to preclinical students. This suggests there is a significant opportunity for additional formal exposure to IR through increasing availability of IR rotations and exposure during the clinical and preclinical years.     

Considerations in Specialty Selections: What Medical Students Think,Know, and Think They Know about Interventional Radiology

PurposeTo compare the motivation, deterrents, knowledge, exposure, and other specialty considerations of first- to fourth-year medical students interested in interventional radiology (IR) with those who are not.Materials and MethodsMatriculants of 5 medical schools varying by region, public/private, class size, and National Institutes of Health research ranking received a 19-question survey with questions about demographics, specialty interests, motivations/deterrents, knowledge, and exposure to IR.ResultsA total of 25.8% (611/2370) of students completed the survey, of which 20.5% (125/611) expressed interest in IR, and 25% (47/186), 26% (40/153), 24% (34/143), and 3% (3/117) of first-year, second-year, third-year, and fourth-year medical students, respectively, were seriously considering IR. Those interested in IR were less motivated by direct patient care (mean, 2.8/5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6–3.0) and longitudinal patient care (mean, 1.6/5; 95% CI, 1.4–1.7) (both, P < .01) and more motivated by salary (2.6/5; 95% CI, 2.3–2.9), job market (2.8/5; 95% CI, 2.6–2.9), and procedures (3.1/5; 95% CI, 2.8–3.4) compared with their peers (all P < .05). Those interested in IR were more certain about their IR knowledge (mean range, 1.6–2.0/3.0; 95% CI, 1.3–2.3) than their peers (mean range, 1.9–2.4/3.0; 95% CI, 1.6–2.1, in which 0 = certain, P ≤ .01); however, both groups scored low in actual knowledge (those considering IR: 35.0–73.2% correct; 95% CI, 23.5–81.4; those who were not: 26.6–66.7% correct; 95% CI, 24.3–75.9, P > .05).ConclusionsAlthough medical students showed interest in IR, they had a limited understanding of IR. IR educators may increase IR interest and understanding among medical students by clarifying the procedural aspects and longitudinal care present in a comprehensive IR practice.     

Career Research Performance Among Radiology Early Career Grant Recipients Compared With National Institutes of Health K Award Recipients

ObjectiveTo compare academic and demographic metrics among recipients of three major early career radiology, interventional radiology, and radiation oncology grants to National Institutes of Health (NIH) K awardees at the time the grants were awarded and then over the course of their careers.MethodsRadiologists who received the RSNA Research Scholar Grant, General Electric Radiology Research Academic Fellowship (GERRAF), American Roentgen Ray Society (ARRS) Scholar Award, or NIH Career Development (K) Award before January 1, 2015, were included. Research metrics at the time of grant award (eg, publications) and subsequent scholarly productivity (eg, academic rank, h-index, NIH funding) were recorded until April 2020. Wilcoxon ranked-sum, χ², logistic regression, and standard least-square regression were used for data analysis.ResultsThere were 279 recipients: 48 K Award, 115 RSNA Research Scholar Grant, 36 ARRS, and 80 GERRAF. At the time of grant awarding, GERRAF recipients were less likely to have an MD-PhD degree (odds ratio [OR]: 0.36; P = .002) and were more likely to be women (OR: 1.55; P = .042) than K Award recipients. Similarly, recipients of the ARRS (OR: 2.87; P = .010) and GERRAF (OR: 3.19; P = .002) were more likely to have a master’s degree. Academic rank, leadership positions, and R01 funding were significant predictors of h-index and total publications over time. Academic rank and the GERRAF were significant predictors of subsequent NIH funding duration but there were no significant predictors of NIH funding amount.ConclusionsEarly career radiology awards, specifically the GERRAF, provide support for female and non-PhD investigators and result in comparable academic performance metrics to NIH K Award recipients.     

Influences of Radiology Trainees on Screening Mammography Interpretation

PurposeParticipation of radiology trainees in screening mammographic interpretation is a critical component of radiology residency and fellowship training. The aim of this study was to investigate and quantify the effects of trainee involvement on screening mammographic interpretation and diagnostic outcomes.MethodsScreening mammograms interpreted at an academic medical center by six dedicated breast imagers over a three-year period were identified, with cases interpreted by an attending radiologist alone or in conjunction with a trainee. Trainees included radiology residents, breast imaging fellows, and fellows from other radiology subspecialties during breast imaging rotations. Trainee participation, patient variables, results of diagnostic evaluations, and pathology were recorded.ResultsA total of 47,914 mammograms from 34,867 patients were included, with an overall recall rate for attending radiologists reading alone of 14.7% compared with 18.0% when involving a trainee (P < .0001). Overall cancer detection rate for attending radiologists reading alone was 5.7 per 1,000 compared with 5.2 per 1,000 when reading with a trainee (P = .517). When reading with a trainee, dense breasts represented a greater portion of recalls (P = .0001), and more frequently, greater than one abnormality was described in the breast (P = .013). Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ versus invasive carcinoma or invasive cancer type was not significantly different. The mean size of cancers in patients recalled by attending radiologists alone was smaller, and nodal involvement was less frequent, though not statistically significantly.ConclusionsThese results demonstrate a significant overall increase in recall rate when interpreting screening mammograms with radiology trainees, with no change in cancer detection rate. Radiology faculty members should be aware of this potentiality and mitigate tendencies toward greater false positives.     

Radiology as seen by medical students

Purpose

To determine the impact of exposing medical students to medical imaging during the first year of the second cycle of medical school (DCEM1) on their perception of this medical specialty and the acquisition of its basic concepts.

Materials and methods

All students in the 2007-2008 graduation class entering into the first year of the second cycle of medical school were anonymously enrolled into this project that included pre-rotation and post-rotation questionnaires, theory classes followed by clinical rotations with clearly predetermined objectives.

Results

A total of 108 students were enrolled, with 70% being females. The parents of the students had a medical or paramedical profession in 46.3% of cases. Before the rotation, 61.6% of students perceived a difference between a hospital-based practice and private practice. Fifty-two percent of students had a clear idea of their professional future prior to the rotation. Five students (4.7%) believed prior to the rotation that it might have an impact on their professional future, versus 63% after the rotation (P < 0.0001). The students whose parents work in the medical or paramedical field do not have a better defined idea of their professional future; on the other hand, they have more interest for radiology (73.6% with high or very high interest versus 52.8%, P = 0.03). After the rotation, there was a significant increase in the number of students with high or very high interest for radiology (77.8% versus 66.7%, P = 0.023). A student noted that he would redirect his career to radiology. There was also a significant increase in the number of students perceiving a difference between a hospital-based practice and private practice (82.2% versus 61.6%, P = 0.003). With regards to radiology knowledge before and after the rotation, there was a significant increase of mean scores (P < 0.001). Eighty-eight percent of students were satisfied or very satisfied with the radiology rotation. Overall, the students believe that 70% of the objectives were achieved. The only criticism from the students was that the clinical instructors were overworked.

Conclusion

Early exposure of medical students to radiology increases their level of interest for the specialty and increases the perception of differences between a hospital-based practice and private practice. The overall knowledge of students about radiology was improved, but the workload of clinical instructors impaired the quality of the rotation.     

First-Year Radiology Residents Teaching Anatomy to First-Year Medical Students: A Symbiotic Relationship

ObjectivesOur institution has developed an educational program in which first-year radiology residents teach first-year medical students during gross anatomy laboratory sessions. The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of this program on medical student knowledge and perceptions of radiology, and on resident attitudes toward teaching.Materials and MethodsFirst-year resident pairs taught small groups of medical students during weekly 15-minute interactive sessions, and were evaluated on teaching skills by senior residents. A survey about attitudes toward radiology and a knowledge quiz were sent to the medical students, and a survey about attitudes toward teaching was sent to the first-year radiology residents, both pre-course and post-course.ResultsStudents’ radiology knowledge significantly increased between the pre-course and post-course survey across all categories tested (P < 0.001). Additionally, there were significant improvements in terms of students’ confidence in radiologic anatomy skills, perceived importance of radiology for medical training, familiarity with the field of radiology, and perception that radiologists are friendly (P < 0.001). Radiology residents felt more confident in their teaching proficiency (P < 0.001) by the conclusion of the course.ConclusionsResident-led small-group teaching sessions during anatomy laboratory are mutually beneficial for medical students and radiology residents. The program also allows radiology residents to be exposed early on in residency to teaching and academic medicine.     

Assessing the Gap in Female Authorship in Radiology: Trends Over the Past Two Decades

PurposeThe aim of this study was to retrospectively identify trends in the representation of female authorship in prominent general radiology journals over the past 2 decades.MethodsA comprehensive search was conducted for all articles published in 1993, 2003, and 2013 in Radiology, the American Journal of Roentgenology (AJR), European Radiology, and Investigative Radiology. The genders of the first and last authors were collected. Chi-square tests were used for statistical analysis, and P values < .05 were considered to indicate statistical significance.ResultsA total of 3,786 articles were reviewed. Overall, women constituted 20.0% authorship, 24.7% of first authors, and 15.2% of senior authors. The average overall female first and senior authorship grew from 19.7% to 32.1% and from 13.6% to 19.1%, respectively from 1993 to 2013. Female first authorship grew over the past 2 decades in the journals reviewed, with significant growth in AJR and Radiology (P < .0001). Female first authorship in the individual journals grew from 16.4%-29.1% in 1993, to 29.1%-34.8% in 2013. Female senior authorship also demonstrated growth in the past 2 decades, growing from 4.3%-17.5% in 1993 to 15.5%-23.2% in 2013. There was significant growth in senior female authorship in Radiology (from 12.1% to 19.2%, P = .004) and European Radiology (from 4.3% to 15.5%, P = .0433). Female senior authorship remained significantly lower than first authorship over the past 2 decades (P = .002, P < .001, and P < .0001).ConclusionsAlthough women’s growth in first authorship in radiology literature is proportional to their growth in the specialty, they continue to remain a minority, especially in senior authorship, and demonstrate similar participation to other medical specialties.     

Differential Motivations for Pursuing Interventional Radiology: Implications for Residency Recruitment

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to compare the motivations of interventional radiology (IR) residency, IR fellowship, and diagnostic radiology (DR) applicants.