Exploring Benefits of Biomedical Engineering PhD vs. Medical Physics PhD

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the decision-making process regarding pursuing a PhD in biomedical engineering versus medical physics, particularly in the context of a master's degree in medical physics and interests in medical imaging and PET-MR data analysis. Participants explore the implications of program accreditation, job market considerations, and personal career goals within the healthcare system.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses interest in a PhD position in biomedical engineering, noting the alignment with their master's work but raises concerns about not being able to complete CAMPEP certification.
  • Another participant questions the necessity of a PhD in an accredited medical physics program if the master's degree is already CAMPEP-accredited, suggesting that the ABR rules may allow for this.
  • Concerns are raised about the job market for PET, with some suggesting it may be less favorable compared to Radiation Oncology Physics, while others highlight the potential for better career prospects in clinical settings.
  • One participant mentions that engineering programs may require additional coursework that could detract from the focus on research, although another participant states their program has minimal requirements.
  • A participant clarifies their intention to pursue an MD-PhD program and work in public healthcare, indicating a specific interest in multimodal PET-MR.
  • Another participant expresses that the MD component of the MD-PhD is employable and views the PhD opportunity as a good fit given the participant's excitement and the supportive environment.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity and implications of pursuing a PhD in biomedical engineering versus medical physics, with no consensus reached on the best path forward. There are also varying opinions on the job market and the relevance of CAMPEP accreditation.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the importance of understanding the current job market for PET and nuclear medicine, as well as the potential impact of program accreditation on career opportunities. There is also mention of the varying requirements across engineering programs that could influence the decision-making process.

snatchingthepi
Messages
145
Reaction score
37
Hey all

I'm finishing up my master's degree in medical physics this year, specifically working in PET-MR data analysis. I have a definite professional interest in medical imaging, and am planning on pursuing this. I have an interesting choice where I've been offered a position as a PhD student in a good lab with a good staff with good publications, and even more important the supervisor seems good too. The work is closely related to what I've already trained in, but is more slanted towards stand-alone PET rather than simultaneous PET-MR, and it is clinical translational research rather than the basic preclinical science I've been involved with.

I'm interested in the work, and I don't see any red flags, except one. This supervisor would not be able to supervise me as a (medical) physics PhD student, rather as a biomedical engineering student. Apart from the fact that this would end any real hope of completing CAMPEP certificate requirements, I don't really see a downside to this, but am asking for opinions and perspectives more informed than mine.

Is there any I should be considering other than what I've listed? Is there a definitely upside or downside to having a doctorate in one or the other?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is your medical physics MSc degree program CAMPEP-accredited? Because if so, I'm not sure you really need to also do a PhD in an accredited medical physics program. I'm not sure exactly what the ABR rules are (assuming you're American) these days, but I think they were just looking for you to have graduated with a degree from an accredited program. I don't think there are time limitations either - although there is probably something to be say for knowledge retention over time.

I can't speak to the PET job market these days. I know it's not as big as the Radiation Oncology Physics market, but it also doesn't have as many students in the pipeline. The last time I spoke to anyone about it directly, (and this was several years ago), I got the impression that it was more closely related to the academic job market where you had to do multiple post-docs and then maybe compete for a rare academic/research position and your odds of making it are low, than to the clinical market, where you have to compete for a residency after the PhD, but generally speaking the odds of turning it into a career are much better (above 9 in 10). What I recommend is that you start digging and figure out what the PET or nuclear medicine market really looks like now and for the foreseeable future.
 
A lot of engineering departments would require that you take many general engineering classes before you proceed to graduate work. If your school would be like that, you will spend a lot of time on subjects that you might not be interested in.
 
Choppy said:
Is your medical physics MSc degree program CAMPEP-accredited? Because if so, I'm not sure you really need to also do a PhD in an accredited medical physics program. I'm not sure exactly what the ABR rules are (assuming you're American) these days, but I think they were just looking for you to have graduated with a degree from an accredited program. I don't think there are time limitations either - although there is probably something to be say for knowledge retention over time.

I can't speak to the PET job market these days. I know it's not as big as the Radiation Oncology Physics market, but it also doesn't have as many students in the pipeline. The last time I spoke to anyone about it directly, (and this was several years ago), I got the impression that it was more closely related to the academic job market where you had to do multiple post-docs and then maybe compete for a rare academic/research position and your odds of making it are low, than to the clinical market, where you have to compete for a residency after the PhD, but generally speaking the odds of turning it into a career are much better (above 9 in 10). What I recommend is that you start digging and figure out what the PET or nuclear medicine market really looks like now and for the foreseeable future.

My school is in Canada and it is CAMPEP accredited. I should mention that I am actually not interested in pursuing a clinical physics residency, but am attempting an MD-PhD program, and I intend to work in the public healthcare system.

I am aware that the nucmed scene is small, but that there are also fewer trainees involved. My interest is specifically multimodal PET-MR, I'd that helps the picture I'm training to paint.
 
FactChecker said:
A lot of engineering departments would require that you take many general engineering classes before you proceed to graduate work. If your school would be like that, you will spend a lot of time on subjects that you might not be interested in.
My school does not require any such thing. The course requirements are actually quite small, and there is a much larger emphasis on publication and attracting funding.
 
snatchingthepi said:
My school is in Canada and it is CAMPEP accredited. I should mention that I am actually not interested in pursuing a clinical physics residency, but am attempting an MD-PhD program, and I intend to work in the public healthcare system.

I am aware that the nucmed scene is small, but that there are also fewer trainees involved. My interest is specifically multimodal PET-MR, I'd that helps the picture I'm training to paint.
In that case I don't really see much of a down side. The MD part of the MD-PhD is quite employable. You've found a PhD project that you're excited about with a supervisor and environment that seems like you'll work well with and has a history of being productive. Sounds like a good fit to me.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: FactChecker
Thank you for the input.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
11K