Easton Neitzel MS3, Shivraj Grewal MD, Manroop Kaur MD, Zachary Sitton MD, Paul Kang MS, MPH, Eric vanSonnenberg MD
{"title":"学术放射科的亚专科组织和奖学金项目:大杂烩。","authors":"Easton Neitzel MS3, Shivraj Grewal MD, Manroop Kaur MD, Zachary Sitton MD, Paul Kang MS, MPH, Eric vanSonnenberg MD","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2024.03.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>As opportunities for radiologists to subspecialize have increased, many avenues to organize Radiology department subspecialties exist. This study seeks to determine how academic U.S. Radiology departments structure themselves with respect to subspecialty divisions/sections, as there are no current standards for how Radiology departments are subdivided. Additionally, the extent of Radiology fellowships offered are assessed. The websites of academic U.S. Radiology departments, a highly influential source of information, were analyzed to perform this study.</p></div><div><h3>Materials & methods</h3><p>Radiology department websites of all allopathic U.S. medical schools (n = 148) were assessed for the following: presence/absence of Radiology department subdivisions, division/section labels, number of divisions/sections, division/section titles, presence/absence of Radiology fellowships, number of fellowships, and fellowships titles.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>114/148 (77 %) medical schools had Radiology department websites. According to their respective websites, 66/114 (58 %) academic Radiology departments had subspecialty divisions/sections, whereas 48/114 (42 %) had no divisions/sections listed. Of the departments that had divisions/sections, the median number of divisions/sections per department was nine, and ranged from two to 14. Fellowships were offered at 82/114 (72 %) academic Radiology departments that had websites, and the median number was six, ranging from one to 13.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There is marked heterogeneity of departmental organization across Radiology departments nationwide, likely due to the lack of current standards for how Radiology departments are subdivided into divisions/sections. Of the 77 % of medical schools that have Radiology department websites, only 58 % of departments listed divisions/sections, and 72 % posted fellowship offerings.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51617,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","volume":"53 4","pages":"Pages 503-506"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Academic radiology department subspeciality organization & fellowship offerings: A hodgepodge\",\"authors\":\"Easton Neitzel MS3, Shivraj Grewal MD, Manroop Kaur MD, Zachary Sitton MD, Paul Kang MS, MPH, Eric vanSonnenberg MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2024.03.010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>As opportunities for radiologists to subspecialize have increased, many avenues to organize Radiology department subspecialties exist. This study seeks to determine how academic U.S. Radiology departments structure themselves with respect to subspecialty divisions/sections, as there are no current standards for how Radiology departments are subdivided. Additionally, the extent of Radiology fellowships offered are assessed. The websites of academic U.S. Radiology departments, a highly influential source of information, were analyzed to perform this study.</p></div><div><h3>Materials & methods</h3><p>Radiology department websites of all allopathic U.S. medical schools (n = 148) were assessed for the following: presence/absence of Radiology department subdivisions, division/section labels, number of divisions/sections, division/section titles, presence/absence of Radiology fellowships, number of fellowships, and fellowships titles.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>114/148 (77 %) medical schools had Radiology department websites. According to their respective websites, 66/114 (58 %) academic Radiology departments had subspecialty divisions/sections, whereas 48/114 (42 %) had no divisions/sections listed. Of the departments that had divisions/sections, the median number of divisions/sections per department was nine, and ranged from two to 14. Fellowships were offered at 82/114 (72 %) academic Radiology departments that had websites, and the median number was six, ranging from one to 13.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There is marked heterogeneity of departmental organization across Radiology departments nationwide, likely due to the lack of current standards for how Radiology departments are subdivided into divisions/sections. Of the 77 % of medical schools that have Radiology department websites, only 58 % of departments listed divisions/sections, and 72 % posted fellowship offerings.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51617,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology\",\"volume\":\"53 4\",\"pages\":\"Pages 503-506\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363018824000550\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363018824000550","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Academic radiology department subspeciality organization & fellowship offerings: A hodgepodge
Introduction
As opportunities for radiologists to subspecialize have increased, many avenues to organize Radiology department subspecialties exist. This study seeks to determine how academic U.S. Radiology departments structure themselves with respect to subspecialty divisions/sections, as there are no current standards for how Radiology departments are subdivided. Additionally, the extent of Radiology fellowships offered are assessed. The websites of academic U.S. Radiology departments, a highly influential source of information, were analyzed to perform this study.
Materials & methods
Radiology department websites of all allopathic U.S. medical schools (n = 148) were assessed for the following: presence/absence of Radiology department subdivisions, division/section labels, number of divisions/sections, division/section titles, presence/absence of Radiology fellowships, number of fellowships, and fellowships titles.
Results
114/148 (77 %) medical schools had Radiology department websites. According to their respective websites, 66/114 (58 %) academic Radiology departments had subspecialty divisions/sections, whereas 48/114 (42 %) had no divisions/sections listed. Of the departments that had divisions/sections, the median number of divisions/sections per department was nine, and ranged from two to 14. Fellowships were offered at 82/114 (72 %) academic Radiology departments that had websites, and the median number was six, ranging from one to 13.
Conclusion
There is marked heterogeneity of departmental organization across Radiology departments nationwide, likely due to the lack of current standards for how Radiology departments are subdivided into divisions/sections. Of the 77 % of medical schools that have Radiology department websites, only 58 % of departments listed divisions/sections, and 72 % posted fellowship offerings.
期刊介绍:
Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology covers important and controversial topics in radiology. Each issue presents important viewpoints from leading radiologists. High-quality reproductions of radiographs, CT scans, MR images, and sonograms clearly depict what is being described in each article. Also included are valuable updates relevant to other areas of practice, such as medical-legal issues or archiving systems. With new multi-topic format and image-intensive style, Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology offers an outstanding, time-saving investigation into current topics most relevant to radiologists.