New article on residency benefits in rad onc: where does your program stack up?

[protoncannon]

In a recent article in the Red Journal, McKenzie surveyed radiation oncology programs and found what residents were receiving in terms of benefits. Thought this would be useful for everyone, especially during interview season.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23523185

Summary of article:

-Median length of research time 6 months (range 1-12 months)
-81% of programs have a research requirement
-54% of residents sent to a biology or physics review course, or this was provided by their department
-60% of programs asked residents to cross cover if the responsible resident was not available
-Educational book fund given in 97%, median $1000, range $250-3000. Provided annually in 63% of programs. Could also be used for ABR fees by 51% (these fees are $400 or so per year, a pain if you have to pay yourself)
-Chief residents received stipends 44%, median $1500, range $180-4000

-All programs allowed residents to attend ASTRO. 68% required research or to be in final year of training
-33% sent residents to spring refreshers
-Full coverage for ASTRO provided in 42%, and 49% provided a set amount, mean $1600
-99% allowed residents to attend non-ASTRO meetings, 89% required research to attend, funding similar
-Residents in general attend 1 non-ASTRO meeting annually, range 0-3

Med students, don't be afraid to ask residents on interviews what sort of benefits are given in the program.

Does this data sound about right to other residents? We really need an educational stipend...

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Aphtalyfe]

In a recent article in the Red Journal, McKenzie surveyed radiation oncology programs and found what residents were receiving in terms of benefits. Thought this would be useful for everyone, especially during interview season.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23523185

Summary of article:

-Median length of research time 6 months (range 1-12 months)
-81% of programs have a research requirement
-54% of residents sent to a biology or physics review course, or this was provided by their department
-60% of programs asked residents to cross cover if the responsible resident was not available
-Educational book fund given in 97%, median $1000, range $250-3000. Provided annually in 63% of programs. Could also be used for ABR fees by 51% (these fees are $400 or so per year, a pain if you have to pay yourself)
-Chief residents received stipends 44%, median $1500, range $180-4000

-All programs allowed residents to attend ASTRO. 68% required research or to be in final year of training
-33% sent residents to spring refreshers
-Full coverage for ASTRO provided in 42%, and 49% provided a set amount, mean $1600
-99% allowed residents to attend non-ASTRO meetings, 89% required research to attend, funding similar
-Residents in general attend 1 non-ASTRO meeting annually, range 0-3

Med students, don't be afraid to ask residents on interviews what sort of benefits are given in the program.

Does this data sound about right to other residents? We really need an educational stipend...

Good find!

 

[Neuronix]

Overall, I think these factors are very important for professional development and happiness, and I applaud the survey authors for identifying these relevant factors for evaluating programs. Here are my thoughts for the applicants trying to evaluate programs:

-Median length of research time 6 months (range 1-12 months)

Research time is elective time. In my opinion, the more research/elective time you get, the better, no matter what your eventual goals. This time is not guaranteed for research if faculty think you are weak in an area or aren't serious about research. For those not serious about research, the time can be used for additional clinical rotations if desired at most programs. This means you have flexibility if there are specific clinical interests you want to get experience in, you want to do away rotations at potential jobs or other academic centers, or you feel like you might be weak in a particular area you're going to end up practicing in. At programs where there is resident coverage expected on all rotations, they can pull you for a rotation you already did if a resident is out for some reason. Additionally, the time is typically partially used up by studying for exams and interviewing for jobs.

-54% of residents sent to a biology or physics review course, or this was provided by their department

Very important for your education.

-60% of programs asked residents to cross cover if the responsible resident was not available

Try to match at a program where this is not the case. Legally a resident is never responsible, and attendings are responsible for patient care. However, at many programs this is pushed onto the residents. This manifests in all sorts of negative ways. If you are sick, there can be tremendous pressure for you to keep working. If someone has to miss a rotation for pregnancy or family emergency or another reason, a different resident can get pulled out of research to cover the resident who is out (see above about no guarantees for your research time). If you want to go to conferences, you may not get to go due to scheduling. You can often be put in the position of having to cover two attendings, often in two entirely different areas, adding to massive workload, confusion, and reduction in learning/educational time. Additionally, vacation times can be very constrained based on the abilities of others to cover you. I away rotated at one program as a medical student (frequently listed as a "top" program in the rankings thread) where residents actually didn't get to take all of their vacation time because they couldn't arrange coverage from other residents.

-Educational book fund given in 97%, median $1000, range $250-3000. Provided annually in 63% of programs. Could also be used for ABR fees by 51% (these fees are $400 or so per year, a pain if you have to pay yourself)

ABR fees are currently $610/year. It's a bummer to go to a program, especially in the first year when you are strapped for cash and just moved somewhere, and have to pay those ABR fees out of your own pocket soon after you start.

-All programs allowed residents to attend ASTRO. 68% required research or to be in final year of training
-33% sent residents to spring refreshers
-Full coverage for ASTRO provided in 42%, and 49% provided a set amount, mean $1600
-99% allowed residents to attend non-ASTRO meetings, 89% required research to attend, funding similar
-Residents in general attend 1 non-ASTRO meeting annually, range 0-3

What's important here is that you get time for conferences, that you get money for conferences, and you get to attend at least one conference a year regardless of your ability to present there.

Med students, don't be afraid to ask residents on interviews what sort of benefits are given in the program.

I would ask gently, but remember two things. First, beggars can't be choosers. That is, if you ask too strongly or appear to be pushy about the issue, they will think you are making demands. You are in no position to bargain or argue, and this is a way not to get ranked. Second, residents at programs want to believe their programs are awesome based on whatever factors they deem to be important. So if a program does not do what I think is important above, they will try to convince you otherwise. Decide for yourself in private when you make your own rank list. For me, I don't go to a "top tier" residency program, but we compare very favorably based on the factors above.

 

[MadamCurie]

-54% of residents sent to a biology or physics review course, or this was provided by their department

Very important for your education.

Not to mention an indictment of the "in-house" teaching of biology and physics in residency programs.

 

[Neuronix]

Not to mention an indictment of the "in-house" teaching of biology and physics in residency programs.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this. We have excellent teaching of biology and physics, yet are still given money and time to attend an external review course.

 

[MadamCurie]

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this. We have excellent teaching of biology and physics, yet are still given money and time to attend an external review course.

In theory, if the teaching of biology and physics was excellent, there should be no need to attend a review course. Of course in practice, some choose to attend them anyway for a quickie review pre-written boards (and/or secondary to insecurity, test taking anxiety, etc.) and that's perfectly fine – everybody has their own "method" when it comes to boards preparation.

However, I feel that doing so really should be at the resident's own expense. That a Department would pay for this says to me that there is - at some level - a lack of confidence in their own teaching faculty.

That's just me though...your mileage may vary.
(Also, as a biology teacher, I'm biased. )

 

[Neuronix]

Second, residents at programs want to believe their programs are awesome based on whatever factors they deem to be important. So if a program does not do what I think is important above, they will try to convince you otherwise. Decide for yourself in private when you make your own rank list.

That applies to faculty as well...

Institutions get ~150k/year per resident in medicare funding, of which they pay residents ~50k (+tax/benefits/malpractice, so maybe $75k). Review courses including travel cost about $1500 (~1% of the PGY-4 funding). I think it's a fine use of resident funding to help them ensure passing of a crucial exam. It should compliment the basic course provided by the program, not replace it. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[CyberKnife19]

In a recent article in the Red Journal, McKenzie surveyed radiation oncology programs and found what residents were receiving in terms of benefits. Thought this would be useful for everyone, especially during interview season.
Summary of article:
-Full coverage for ASTRO provided in 42%, and 49% provided a set amount, mean $1600
-99% allowed residents to attend non-ASTRO meetings, 89% required research to attend, funding similar
-Residents in general attend 1 non-ASTRO meeting annually, range 0-3
Does this data sound about right to other residents? We really need an educational stipend...

For those of you seriously interested in an academic career, this is very important. Meetings not only serve as an opportunity to present your work, but also as a chance to network and meet others in our field, which will be vital when it comes time to initiate your job search. I would be hesitant to rank a program highly if they don't fully cover the expenses of the meeting (we have a $2K/meeting budget, which comfortably covers everything, even in an expensive place like Boston or SF) and cover the cost of going to multiple meetings per year.