ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To generate an understanding of the primary concerns facing medical physicists regarding integration of a demanding technical career with their personal lives. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In 2019, we recruited 32 medical physics residents, faculty, and staff via emails to US medical physics residency program directors to participate in a 1-hour, semistructured interview that elicited their thoughts on several topics, including work-life integration. Standard techniques of qualitative thematic analysis were used to generate the research findings. RESULTS: Of the participants, 50% were women and 69% were non-Hispanic White individuals, with a mean (SD) age of 37.5 (7.4) years. They were evenly split between residents and faculty or staff. Participant responses centered around 5 primary themes: the gendered distribution of household responsibilities, the effect of career or work on home and family life, the effect of family on career or work, support and strategies for reconciling work-life conflicts, and the role of professional societies in addressing work-life integration. Participants expressed concern about the effect of heavy workloads on home life, with female respondents more likely to report carrying the majority of the household burden. CONCLUSIONS: Medical physicists experience challenges in managing work-life conflict amid a diverse array of personal and professional responsibilities. Further investigations are needed to quantitatively assess the division of work and household labor by gender in medical physics, particularly after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, but this study's qualitative findings suggest that the profession should consider ways to address root causes of work-life conflict to promote the future success and well-being of all medical physicists, and perhaps women in particular.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Radiation Oncology Education Collaborative Study Group (ROECSG) hosted its annual international symposium using a virtual format in May 2020. This report details the experience of hosting a virtual meeting and presents attendee feedback on the platform. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The ROECSG symposium was hosted virtually on May 15, 2020. A postsymposium survey was distributed electronically to assess attendee demographics, participation, and experience. Attendee preference and experience were queried using 3-point and 5-point Likert-type scales, respectively. Symplur LLC was used to generate analytics for the conference hashtag (#ROECSG). RESULTS: The survey was distributed to all 286 registrants, with a response rate of 67% (191 responses). Seventeen nonattendee responses were omitted from this analysis, for a total of 174 included respondents. Eighty-two attendees (47%) were present for the entire symposium. A preference for a virtual symposium was expressed by 78 respondents (45%), whereas 44 (25%) had no preference and 52 (30%) preferred an in-person meeting. A total of 150 respondents (86%) rated the symposium as "extremely" well organized. Respondents who had not attended a prior in-person ROECSG symposium were more likely to prefer the virtual format (P = .03). Seventy-eight respondents (45%) reported a preference for the virtual platform for reviewing scholarly work, and 103 (59%) reported a preference for an in-person platform for networking. On the day of the symposium, #ROECSG had 408 tweets and 432,504 impressions. CONCLUSIONS: The 2020 ROECSG symposium was well received and can serve as a framework for future virtual meetings. Although the virtual setting may facilitate sharing research, networking aspects are more limited. Effort is needed to develop hybrid virtual and in-person meetings that meet the needs of participants in both settings. Social media is a significant avenue for dissemination and discussion of information and may be valuable in the virtual setting.