Explore the vast range of titles available.

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) is a nonprofit professional society whose primary purposes are to advance the science, education, and professional practice of medical physics. The AAPM has more than 8,000 members and is the principal organization of medical physicists in the United States. The AAPM will periodically define new practice guidelines for medical physics practice to help advance the science of medical physics and to improve the quality of service to patients throughout the United States. Existing medical physics practice guidelines will be reviewed for revision or renewal, as appropriate, on their fifth anniversary or sooner. Each medical physics practice guideline represents a policy statement by the AAPM, has undergone a thorough consensus process in which it has been subjected to extensive review, and requires the approval of the Professional Council. The medical physics practice guidelines recognize that the safe and effective use of diagnostic and therapeutic radiology requires specific training, skills, and techniques, as described in each document. Reproduction or modification of the published practice guidelines and technical standards by those entities not providing these services is not authorized. The following terms are used in the AAPM practice guidelines: Must and Must Not: Used to indicate that adherence to the recommendation is considered necessary to conform to this practice guideline. Should and Should Not: Used to indicate a prudent practice to which exceptions may occasionally be made in appropriate circumstances. Approved by AAPM Professional Council 3‐31‐2017 and Executive Committee 4‐4‐2017.

The establishment of guidelines and curriculum standards for medical physics residency training is a critical component of setting expectations and competencies for the profession. Since the last publication of these standards, residency training has become integrated into the eligibility criteria for most medical physics certification bodies. The rapid growth of medical physics requires periodic review of the curriculum to remove outdated approaches, update established knowledge, and add emerging technologies. The goal of this document is to provide a reference standard for residency training program directors, training mentors, and residents to guide creation and/or optimization of their program's curriculum. The document is intentionally forward‐looking to capture emerging technological advances including hybrid diagnostic and therapeutic delivery systems and applications of image processing. This document is an update of the current residency training curriculum. Version history of residency training guidelines Publication Title Date 2013 Essentials and Guidelines for Clinical Medical Physics Residency Training Programs—AAPM Report No. 249 2006 Essentials and Guidelines for Hospital‐Based Medical Physics Residency Training Programs—Report No. 90 1992 Essentials and Guidelines for Hospital‐Based Medical Physics Residency Training Programs—Report No. 36 The Work Group on Periodic Review of Medical Physics Residency Training (WGMPRT) would like to acknowledge the authors of past versions of this document as they form the basis for this update. It is the sincere hope of the WGMPRT that this report will continue to be used by the medical physics community to guide training in the profession.

Most modern medical physics residency programs consist of a 24‐month clinical training curriculum based on standards and recommendations of medical physics organizations such as the Commission on Accreditation of Medical Physics Education Programs (CAMPEP) and American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM). Although these recommendations are extensive, their implementation is inconsistent across programs, and the quality of resident evaluation and feedback is highly variable. Competency‐based medical education (CBME) is a learner‐centered educational approach that focuses on whether the learner is acquiring the knowledge, skills, and attitudes required to become a competent professional upon graduation. Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) are an example of a CBME approach that could improve the preparation of medical physicists by (1) providing a consensus‐based framework for assessing the competence and independence of trainees in residency programs based on their demonstrated clinical capability, (2) facilitating feedback to residents based on their independence and competence in performing routine clinical tasks expected of a practicing medical physicist, and (3) providing a metric for programs to assess the success of their training programs and compare to other residency programs. This article describes EPAs and their potential use for assessment in medical physics residency programs.

Medical Physics education is largely delivered through accredited programs where admission numbers and funding for students are controlled by the individual institutions providing the educational programs. Public data from these accredited graduate programs, along with funding data, can be used to analyze institutionally driven trends in the market for providing this education. Temporal trends from 2017 to 2023 show robust growth in MS graduates, increasing at an average of 17.7 per year, as compared to steady but modest growth in PhDs, increasing by 3.6 per year. The current ratio is 2:1 in MS:PhD for total annual graduates in North America. Trends in funding show self‐funding of MS students is a dominant pathway in domestic programs, with this being less dominant in international programs. Those programs dominated by accredited MS education have their largest fraction of faculty in radiation oncology departments, whereas those dominated by PhD education have their largest fraction of faculty in radiology departments. Overall, NIH funding in the space of radiation diagnostics and therapeutics has been largely static over this timeframe, but with a notable recent rise in NCI funding in the last 5 years. This can be contrasted to a substantial 5X–6X rise in NIH funding for engineering research programs during this same period, with significant increases in trainee funding there. Taken as a whole, this survey shows that growth in the field of medical physics education is dominated by MS graduates, presumably servicing the expanded growth needs for well‐trained clinical physicists. However, the research infrastructure that supports PhD training in medical physics seems likely to be growing modestly and has missed the growth trend of NIH funding to non‐accredited programs such as biomedical engineering.

In order to independently supervise the medical use of byproduct material, physicists in the United States (US) must legally meet the qualifications defined by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in the 35th part of the tenth title of the Code of Federal Regulations (§ 10 CFR Part 35). The American Board of Radiology (ABR) relinquished its NRC‐recognized specialty board (NSB) status at the end of 2023, which eliminated the NSB application pathway for those who earn ABR certification in 2024 and beyond. While these changes in NSB status are not retroactive and will not affect eligibility for diplomates who already possess certificates, these changes will nonetheless have repercussions for those individuals who regularly provide training and experience (T&E) attestations to the NRC, such as residency program directors, brachytherapy rotation preceptors, or radiation safety officers. This article will focus on the repercussions for new authorized medical physicist and radiation safety officer applicants with ABR certificates to be conferred in 2024 and later.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to collect data on current practices for teaching and assessing professionalism in CAMPEP‐accredited residency programs. Methods A survey of 21 questions was sent to 160 program directors (PDs) of CAMPEP‐accredited residency programs. A list of professionalism skills was compiled from the AAPM MPLA curriculum: (a) Personal and interpersonal, (b) professional and developmental, and (c) executive and administrative. The survey collected information on: (1) residency program respondent demographics, (2) essential professionalism skills and training methods, (3) confidence and satisfaction in teaching professionalism, (4) assessment of professionalism, (5) barriers and desired resources, (6) training of PD and staff in professionalism, and (7) free response. Descriptive statistics and thematic analyses were used to evaluate the collected data. Results A total of 97 respondents completed the survey (therapy = 75, diagnostic = 22) with a 61% response rate. 16 out of 24 professionalism skills were deemed essential for trainees to develop during residency training. While 92% teach professionalism, only 51% reported confidence in teaching these skills. The ABR/ACR/RSNA/AAPM/ASTRO/ARR/ARS online modules are used by 87% but only 31% indicated that the modules are sufficient. Only 10% use a structured method for assessment. The majority (59%) assess professionalism in an ad‐hoc manner and 22% only assess when problems arise. 44% reported facing barriers to implementing a professionalism curriculum. The main barriers for developing a professionalism curriculum included: lack of time (39%), resources (32%), or expertise (26%). 79% reported that case studies were the most desired resource. 47% of respondents indicated receiving formal professionalism training. Conclusions There is a strong need and desire for structured professionalism training in residency programs. This study presents a consensus understanding of the professionalism skills that are deemed essential and teachable during residency and has identified areas for improvement in teaching, assessing, and developing curricula.

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) is a nonprofit professional society whose primary purposes are to advance the science, education and professional practice of medical physics. The AAPM has more than 8,000 members and is the principal organization of medical physicists in the United States. The AAPM will periodically define new practice guidelines for medical physics practice to help advance the science of medical physics and to improve the quality of service to patients throughout the United States. Existing medical physics practice guidelines will be reviewed for the purpose of revision or renewal, as appropriate, on their fifth anniversary or sooner. Each medical physics practice guideline represents a policy statement by the AAPM, has undergone a thorough consensus process in which it has been subjected to extensive review, and requires the approval of the Professional Council. The medical physics practice guidelines recognize that the safe and effective use of diagnostic and therapeutic radiology requires specific training, skills, and techniques, as described in each document. Reproduction or modification of the published practice guidelines and technical standards by those entities not providing these services is not authorized. The following terms are used in the AAPM practice guidelines: Must and Must Not: Used to indicate that adherence to the recommendation is considered necessary to conform to this practice guideline. Should and Should Not: Used to indicate a prudent practice to which exceptions may occasionally be made in appropriate circumstances.

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) is a nonprofit professional society whose mission is “Advancing medicine through excellence in the science, education and professional practice of medical physics.” The AAPM has roughly 10,000 members and is the principal organization of medical physicists in the United States. The AAPM will periodically define new practice guidelines for medical physics practice to help advance the science of medical physics and to improve the quality of service to patients throughout the United States. Existing medical physics practice guidelines will be reviewed for the purpose of revision or renewal, as appropriate, on their fifth anniversary or sooner. Each medical physics practice guideline (MPPG) represents a policy statement by the AAPM, has undergone a thorough consensus process in which it has been subjected to extensive review, and requires the approval of the Professional Council. The medical physics practice guidelines recognize that the safe and effective use of diagnostic and therapeutic radiology requires specific training, skills, and techniques, as described in each document. Reproduction or modification of the published practice guidelines and technical standards by those entities not providing these services is not authorized. This report is an update of MPPG10.a, published in 2018, and provides the current minimum guidelines for the scope of practice for clinical medical physics as it has evolved to meet emerging needs and changes in practice. The following terms are used in the AAPM practice guidelines: Must and Must Not: Used to indicate that adherence to the recommendation is considered necessary to conform to this practice guideline. While must is the term to be used in the guidelines, if an entity that adopts the guideline has shall as the preferred term, the AAPM considers that must and shall have the same meaning. Should and Should Not: Used to indicate a prudent practice to which exceptions may occasionally be made in appropriate circumstances.

Working Group on Teaching Educators and Clinicians How (WGTEACH) has been charged with writing a report to review best, evidence‐based practices in various aspects of the teaching of medical physics. These aspects include not only didactic teaching and mentoring in the classroom and clinic, but also teaching K‐12 and undergraduate students and interacting with the public, including patients. This report also touches on virtual and remote learning, adult learning theory, implications for teaching from neuroscience research on learning, and the role of accrediting and governing agencies in education.

This book provides a foundation for humanitarian engineering as applied to oncology care, drawing from various disciplines including radiation oncology.