Cleaning Without SOAP: How Program Directors Should Respond to Going Unmatched in 2020 In Regard to Kharofa et al

Abstract

The recent recommendations by Kharofa et al endorsed by several radiation oncology program directors was of great interest. 1 Kharofa J. Tendulkar R. Fields E. et al. Cleaning without SOAP: How program directors should respond to going unmatched in 2020. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2020; 106: 241-242 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (12) Google Scholar ,2 Kharofa J. In regard to Kharofa et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2020; 107: 222 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (3) Google Scholar I was a member of the American Society for Radiation Oncology workforce committee for many years and involved in the 2012 and 2017 workforce surveys. A majority of responding radiation oncologists in the 2017 survey believed there was an oversupply of radiation oncologists. 3 Fung C.Y. Chen E. Vapiwala N. et al. The American Society for Radiation Oncology 2017 Radiation Oncologist Workforce Study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019; 103: 547-556 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (67) Google Scholar This same perception among recent medical students has likely led to decreased interest in pursuing radiation oncology as a career. In turn, this has led to unfilled positions in residency programs in the 2019 and 2020 match. Kharofa et al suggest that the market approach among radiation oncology residency programs is the best approach to balancing program size with demand. In such an approach, less popular programs (presumably less academically prestigious) will not fill their programs and thus should reduce their positions. Cleaning without SOAP: How Program Directors Should Respond to Going Unmatched in 2020International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, PhysicsVol. 106Issue 2PreviewIn the article by Bates et al,1 the authors nicely summarize data from the 2019 National Residency Matching Program for Radiation Oncology that revealed an unmatched rate of 14.5% (30 positions), representing a 15-year high. Expansion of residency positions in radiation oncology has been well documented, more than doubling since 2001 (211 vs 93 positions).1 In 2019, for the first time, significantly more positions were available than candidates applying. As discussed by Agarwal et al,2 despite the gap in 2019, ultimately more total positions were filled relative to 2018 owing to candidates who did not originally apply to radiation oncology filling in the Supplemental Offer and Acceptance Program (SOAP). Full-Text PDF In Reply to PoharInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, PhysicsVol. 108Issue 3PreviewThanks to the author for the comments1 regarding our opinion piece “Cleaning Without SOAP: How Program Directors Should Respond to Going Unmatched in 2020.”2 The authors state that “Kharofa et al suggest that the market approach among radiation oncology residency programs is the best approach in balancing program size with demand.” We are not advocating that this position represents the “best” step in matching workforce needs to current demand. Rather, our view is that we should ensure applicants are making an informed career choice and should not potentiate oversupply in the current job market if the demand does not exist. Full-Text PDF