ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2026
Survey of work-from-home experiences among medical physicists in Southern California during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the work-from-home (WFH) status of medical physicists in the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Southern California chapter (SCC) during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIALS AND
methodsAn anonymous online survey was conducted through the SurveyMonkey platform and distributed to members of the AAPM SCC in January 2023. The 19 survey questions included eight multiple-choice questions to collect demographic and background information, ten Likert-scale items evaluating reasons for WFH, efficiency, flexibility, clinical coverage, collegial relationships, leadership trust, work hours, operating costs, employee satisfaction, and impacts on education, training, and research, plus one open-ended question to obtain qualitative feedback. and the data was analyzed using both quantitative and qualitive methods. Quantitative data were summarized using descriptive statistics, while qualitative responses were thematically categorized.
resultsAt the end of a 5-week collection period (January 3, 2023, to February 10, 2023), a total of 62 responses were received (33% response rate). Most respondents identified the COVID-19 pandemic as the primary driver of WFH and reported that remote work increased job satisfaction, flexibility, and productivity while enabling timely completion of clinical duties. Reported concerns included reduced collegial relationships, limited trust in leadership, extended work beyond official hours, and decreased visibility relative to other clinical staff. Qualitative responses emphasized benefits such as reduced commuting and improved work-life balance, along with challenges for on-site clinical duties and training. Hybrid work models were frequently identified as the most practical long-term solution.
conclusionsThis pilot study compared the WFH status among medical physicists from AAPM SCC during and after the COVID-19 pandemic and highlights both advantages and limitations of WFH for medical physicists. WFH offers notable benefits for medical physicists, including enhanced flexibility and satisfaction. However, essential clinical responsibilities require on-site presence. These findings support the development of tailored hybrid work models and inform future workforce strategies. Expansion to a national survey is planned to further evaluate WFH practices within the medical physics community.
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.