ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
Perspectives on program duration and research: A survey of graduates of a 3-year medical physics residency program.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Perspectives on program duration and research: A survey of graduates of a 3-year medical physics residency program.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe goal of this manuscript is to evaluate strengths and weaknesses of a 3-year medical physics residency program with the first year dedicated to research and the remaining 2 years dedicated to clinical training.
methodsAn anonymous survey was distributed to graduates of a 3-year medical physics residency program with a dedicated year of research. Questions focused on several categories: (1) in retrospect, factors graduates considered at the time of application, (2) aspects of respondents' career and life after graduating from residency, (3) respondents' opinions on the residency duration, and (4) research productivity during residency.
resultsOf 22 graduates who were contacted, 17 filled out the survey. In retrospect, the most impactful consideration at the time of application was quality of clinical training. Extra time for research was reported as the factor with the most positive career impact and financial considerations as the most negative impact of completing a 3-year residency. Preference for a 3-year residency at the time of application and in retrospect was expressed by 47% and 88% of respondents, respectively. 71% of respondents would recommend applying to a 3-year program to current residency candidates, and 29% respondents said their recommendation on entering a 3-year program would depend on the candidate's interests. 76% of respondents preferred dedicated time for research during residency.
conclusionsThe optimal duration of medical physics residency depends on the goals and career objectives of the incoming residents. Two years may be an optimal duration for clinical training. For candidates interested in a career with a substantial research component, a 3-year program may be a good option, and graduates express favorable opinions after completing such a program. A 4-year residency duration is not viewed favorably by the graduates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.