ArticleSkeletal radiology2026
Survey of the musculoskeletal radiology workforce: hybrid and remote (work from home) practice models.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess current trends and impacts of hybrid (HYB) and work from home (WFH) practice models on the musculoskeletal (MSK) radiology workforce and explore implications for recruitment and the future of the subspecialty. MATERIALS AND
methodsA 38-question voluntary, anonymous survey was distributed to the Society of Skeletal Radiology (SSR) membership (n = 1060). Descriptive statistics and chi-squared test were performed to analyze demographics, trends, and preferences for HYB-WFH practice models. Thematic analysis of open-ended responses identified perceptions and impacts of HYB-WFH.
resultsThe survey response rate was 30% (314 respondents). Most (89%) work in practices that support HYB-WFH. Most (84%) felt HYB-WFH was extremely (54%) or somewhat important (30%) but would not consider the job if it meant reduced compensation (56%) or higher productivity requirements (52%). HYB was the most desired work model (84%), followed by WFH (13%) and in-person (4%). Preference for HYB-WFH was associated with geographic residence, job location (urban/suburban/rural), and commute time (p < 0.05), but not age, gender, dependents, caregiver status, or career stage. Perceived benefits included improved work-life balance, job satisfaction, and productivity, with possible tradeoffs in career development, collegiality, and trainee education. Among 59% planning to change jobs in the next 5 years, motivating factors included workload (66%), compensation (54%), and HYB-WFH (39%). Most preferred HYB for their next job.
conclusionHYB-WFH practice models are strongly desired by the MSK workforce, regardless of age, gender, and life and career situation. Embracing HYB-WFH trends is key to supporting workforce sustainability and adapting to an evolving job market.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42144439What 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.