Medical Physics is an exciting field

[kejiu]

Entry-level positions are very competative these days, however, there is still a significant demand for qualified medical physicists and I don't see this going away any time soon.

In theory, you can cross over from EE into medical physics. However, you will not be as competative for residency positions as a graduate from an accredited medical physics program. So you may be able to find a job, but it likely won't be an ideal one (ie. you may end up having to move to a less-than-desirable location, there won't be any guarantee that you'll receive appropriate training, and you could even end up in a position where your responsibilities outweigh your qualifications).

One trend I've seen lately is people with Ph.D.s in other fields taking a 2 year M.Sc. in accredited medical physics programs. This essentially makes them as competative as Ph.D. med phys graduates.

Another option is to keep an eye on the AAPM job positings for post-doctoral positions. To attract top quality candidates to these positions, employers will sometimes be willing to balance post-doctoral research with part-time clinical training.

Thank you very much for your reply. It will be my honor that we can discuss through my email I sent you in the message too.

 

[Shoe]

Does anyone know if Resident-Scientist programs for Medical Physics exist (for physicians in their residency)? How difficult would it be for a physician with no physics background to enter these programs?

 

[Choppy]

Does anyone know if Resident-Scientist programs for Medical Physics exist (for physicians in their residency)? How difficult would it be for a physician with no physics background to enter these programs?

A medical physicist is a physicist and as such a background in physics is necessary for entry into the field. Usually, physicians with an interest in medical physics will pursue either radiation oncology or radiology. In known radiation oncology there is a research component to the residency at the facility I work in and many of the residents end up working rather closely with medical physicists. Beyond this, many radiation oncologists partake in a research fellowship for one year after the residency. So if one has the interest, the opportunities will be there.

Also, just for clarification, a 'medical physics residency' is not a medical residency. It encompasses the clinical component of medical physics training and entry-level work beyond graduate school.

 

[Shoe]

Thanks Choppy. What I was referring to is that instead of doing an MD/PhD curriculum in medical school, some programs (Stanford, VCU) allow an MD to pursue a PhD during their medical residency (hence Resident Scientist), but are usually restricted to Molecular/Cellular Biology.

 

[kejiu]

Also, just for clarification, a 'medical physics residency' is not a medical residency. It encompasses the clinical component of medical physics training and entry-level work beyond graduate school.

When you go to the job market, will the 2-year-residency account for the 2-year working experience?

 

[Choppy]

Thanks Choppy. What I was referring to is that instead of doing an MD/PhD curriculum in medical school, some programs (Stanford, VCU) allow an MD to pursue a PhD during their medical residency (hence Resident Scientist), but are usually restricted to Molecular/Cellular Biology.

Yes, I don't know too much about these programs, but biology isn't too far of a jump from medicine - especially if one already has an undergraduate degree in the subject of interest. This kind of thing might be plausible if one has an undergraduate/graduate degree in physics, but I haven't heard of anyone doing it.

 

[Choppy]

When you go to the job market, will the 2-year-residency account for the 2-year working experience?

Yes, absolutely. In fact, in a lot of ways a residency can be better than 2 years of work in a generic 'entry-level' position, because residencies are usually set up to expose the resident to as many different aspects of the field as possible, whereas some entry level work is essentially QA 24/7. (The down side is that residents typically are paid less).

 

[kejiu]

Thank you very much for your reply, again. I also go to www.aapm.org, do you think it's possible for me to get a student account even if I am EE student? Thanks

 

[Choppy]

Thank you very much for your reply, again. I also go to www.aapm.org, do you think it's possible for me to get a student account even if I am EE student? Thanks

I think so, but you'll have to check out their membership rules. From what I recall, you need a letter from your supervisor or department stating that you are indeed a registered student, but I don't think they're too picky about actual program content or title.

 

[NeoDevin]

Go Me! I just got accepted to the MSc. Medical Physics program here (Univ. of Alberta).

 

[Shoe]

Congrats, Devin.

 

[kejiu]

Go Me! I just got accepted to the MSc. Medical Physics program here (Univ. of Alberta).

Congratulation NeoDevin, could you please share some details of your application? Thank you so much!

 

[NeoDevin]

Congratulation NeoDevin, could you please share some details of your application? Thank you so much!

What details would you like? I filled out the application forms, got letters of reference from my past research supervisors, submitted my transcript and wrote a cover letter. Nothing terribly special, standard application procedure. They took their time with the admissions decisions though (only heard back from them a couple of weeks ago).

If you want to know anything specific, let me know and I'll post it.

 

[Ian_Brooks]

a lot of these posts coincide with nuclear medicine.

 

[kejiu]

I think so, but you'll have to check out their membership rules. From what I recall, you need a letter from your supervisor or department stating that you are indeed a registered student, but I don't think they're too picky about actual program content or title.

Hi, Choppy, how are you these days? I asked one professor of Medical Physics at LSU, he replied me that I can direct apply the Medical Physics Residency if I have my PhD in EE. What do you think? Thank you.

 

[Choppy]

Hi, Choppy, how are you these days? I asked one professor of Medical Physics at LSU, he replied me that I can direct apply the Medical Physics Residency if I have my PhD in EE. What do you think? Thank you.

There's no reason that you can't apply for a residency position with a PhD in a separate, but related field. The issue that would come up would be that you wouldn't be as competative for the positions available as someone from an accredited medical physics graduate program (and residencies are quite competative to get into).

I know multiple graduate students who already have their PhDs, but have decided to enter a medical physics M.Sc. program because they wanted to get into the field, but weren't able to get hired on as residents or junior physicists anywhere.

A lot can depend on what's available at the time you graduate.

 

[SonyAlmeida]

Couple of questions. I'm a senior undergrad.

- Is undergrad research that important? I don't really have any of it and will only have a very little bit before I start applying.

- How does the financial aid angle usually look for master's students?

- Is a master's sufficient to go straight for a residency?

 

[Choppy]

Couple of questions. I'm a senior undergrad.

- Is undergrad research that important? I don't really have any of it and will only have a very little bit before I start applying.

- How does the financial aid angle usually look for master's students?

- Is a master's sufficient to go straight for a residency?

1. The more research experience you have, in general, the more competative you will be when applying, but it's not really necessary. Lots of students are accepted without it. I might recommend doing a senior thesis project if that's an option for you. That counts as research experience and more importantly it will likely lead to a good letter of recommendation.

2. This is highly dependent on the program. When I went through, I was supported by a teaching assistanceship and research stipend. But not all programs guarantee this for a master's student. In some places you can also get part-time work doing quality assurance, which is very valuable, not just from an immediate financial point of view, but it makes you more competative for residency positions.

3. Sufficient - yes. Especially in the US. In general, a Ph.D. will make you more competative, but this depends on the institution you want to work in.

 

[SonyAlmeida]

Thanks. I've been really worried about my career lately, since I don't feel like I'm 'passionate' about physics even though I'm doing really well in the classes.

 

[lovelife136]

I am a year 13 student in the UK. I am very interested in medical physics as I have until recently been planning on doing biochemistry at uni and heading for some pharmaceutical company. However, my AS results (despite being good, 3As and a B) have rather pushed me in the physics direction. I find the medical applications of other science subjects facinating and therefore think that medical physics would be a good destination to aim for. I am in the process to applying to unis through UCAS, at the moment I am trying to write my personal statement. Would you recommend doing a pure physics degree with some optional modules of medical physics, or a degree that specialises more heavily on medical physics? I plan on doing an Msc. Any advice would be welcomed.

Thanks

 

[alexgmcm]

I am a year 13 student in the UK. I am very interested in medical physics as I have until recently been planning on doing biochemistry at uni and heading for some pharmaceutical company. However, my AS results (despite being good, 3As and a B) have rather pushed me in the physics direction. I find the medical applications of other science subjects facinating and therefore think that medical physics would be a good destination to aim for. I am in the process to applying to unis through UCAS, at the moment I am trying to write my personal statement. Would you recommend doing a pure physics degree with some optional modules of medical physics, or a degree that specialises more heavily on medical physics? I plan on doing an Msc. Any advice would be welcomed.

Thanks

These are the MSc degrees accredited by IPEM so it would probably be easier to study at these universities, http://www.ipem.org.uk/ipem_public/default.asp?id=998 there are lots of them as you can see with a whole range of UCAS grade offers, but with your grades I'd advise Surrey or Imperial etc. (i.e the decent ones)

 

[Choppy]

LoveLife136,
I recommed doing a pure physics degree. Specializing too early can sometimes close more doors than it opens.

A medical physicist is first and foremost a physicist. Sometimes 'medical physics' undergraduate programs can water down the physics side of things, limiting the number of traditional advanced physics classes such as E&M, quantum, stat mech, mathematical methods, etc., for survey-type courses that introduce topics that you'll cover in necessary detail once you get into graduate school. Not all programs do this, but it's just something to be aware of.

 

[mushpuppy]

Hi LoveLife

I concur with the previous post - don't narrow your options too much as you can always specialise later. You should study what you are interested in & that will sustain your motivation, but remember that general physics topics are relevant to many areas, whereas studying specific areas narrows you down immediately.

If you choose to do an MPhys for example, that's 4 years including the Masters but you would need to do an accredited MSc in Medical Physics as part of your training anyway. So you either need to apply to the Universities which provide this or choose a good generic physics / physics with subspecialty (or less ideally, physics joint honours unless it's something along the lines of physics and maths) or else just choose a good BSc course at the place of your choice and go on a year earlier direct to focusing on an accredited MSc.

At this point you may not have work experience, but that's another good way to demonstrate commitment once you start applying for training posts. In the meantime, concentrate on finding a physics course in a uni that you feel is right for you - extracurricular, place, course, tutors...you want to keep your namesake attitude for sure.

all the best with your search

 

[qball]

You guys are joking, right?

Differential equations for medical physics? Been in the program for a year and never saw one. Advanced EM? If you knew advanced EM you'd be able to one-up the professors. Graduate course work in physics? Almost unnecessary, and I'm in a Ph.d. program.

Obviously the people writing on this forum have no experience in medical physics and are basing their posts off of school homepages that boast the rigor of their programs.

For a realistic take on medical physics education at the graduate level, see posts here:

http://www.physicsgre.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2466#p24320

 

[Norman]

You guys are joking, right?

Differential equations for medical physics? Been in the program for a year and never saw one. Advanced EM? If you knew advanced EM you'd be able to one-up the professors. Graduate course work in physics? Almost unnecessary, and I'm in a Ph.d. program.

Obviously the people writing on this forum have no experience in medical physics and are basing their posts off of school homepages that boast the rigor of their programs.

For a realistic take on medical physics education at the graduate level, see posts here:

http://www.physicsgre.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2466#p24320

While you are probably right for some posts in this thread, Choppy actually works in medical physics if memory serves. Don't be so quick to dismiss and assume. Just because your experience is one way, does not mean everyone else's will.

 

[qball]

While you are probably right for some posts in this thread, Choppy actually works in medical physics if memory serves. Don't be so quick to dismiss and assume. Just because your experience is one way, does not mean everyone else's will.

A medical physicist is first and foremost a physicist? This makes me think he either doesn't work in medical physics, as claimed, or that he is covering for the fact that medical physicists are little more than over-glorified medical technicians.

This is, in fact, the great secret of medical physics. You don't need to know anything about medicine or physics.

 

[Choppy]

A medical physicist is first and foremost a physicist? This makes me think he either doesn't work in medical physics, as claimed, or that he is covering for the fact that medical physicists are little more than over-glorified medical technicians.

This is, in fact, the great secret of medical physics. You don't need to know anything about medicine or physics.

This makes me think this poster has yet to pass his or her qualification exam.

I think some people look at the first, basic courses in medical physics and form their opinion about the entire field based on those. They see for example some basic dosimetry calculations that use the inverse square law, some TMRs and a wedge factor and think that's all there is to the field. But that's like basing your opinion of astrophysics on a first year astronomy course.

It is true that we don't use differential equations or advanced E&M or quantum every day in the clinic. But they come up in research, or when you're given a problem in the clinic that the "technicians" (dosimetrists, radiation therapists, imaging technicians), engineers, trades, and physicians can't solve.

One of the problems my research group is interested in for example is combining a linear accelerator with an MRI unit. Try solving some of the RF issues that come up without any background in E&M. Or for that matter try designing any of your own equipment beyond simple phantoms. I have many days where I wish I had a stronger background in electrical engineering.

Or what if a physician asks you to perform a BED (biologically equivalent dose) calculation that accounts for aspects of tumor proliferation that aren't covered in the "standard" formulas? If you have to tell the physician that they had better call a "real" physicist, who took a differential equations class, then you're not doing your job.

What about medicine? To the physicist, a human being is just an irregularly shaped bag of water with a few heterogeneities, right? We don't ever have to account for tissue tolerances when checking treatment plans, or estimate dosimetric uncertainties based on patient motion, or assist physicians with contouring, or write up clinical protocols and procedures, or fuse anatomical images. In fact an argument could be made that medical physicists know more about anatomy and physiology than physicians in some medical disciplines.

I would close by saying that just because we aren't working on a neutrino oscillation problems, does not mean that medical physicists aren't doing physics.

I do worry because there are some medical physicists who hold similar opinions to this poster. These are largely the ones who have done the minimum required to get into the field, contribute little or no research, and who trust manufacturers of medical equipment to get it right and follow pre-defined check-lists for their QA without question.

That sound you hear is Harold Johns rolling in his grave.

And if you have any questions about my credentials, feel free to PM me.

 

[qball]

It is true that we don't use differential equations or advanced E&M or quantum every day in the clinic. But they come up in research, or when you're given a problem in the clinic that the "technicians" (dosimetrists, radiation therapists, imaging technicians), engineers, trades, and physicians can't solve.

Solving engineering problems does not make you a physicist.

Or for that matter try designing any of your own equipment beyond simple phantoms. I have many days where I wish I had a stronger background in electrical engineering.

Electrical engineering is not physics.

Or what if a physician asks you to perform a BED (biologically equivalent dose) calculation that accounts for aspects of tumor proliferation that aren't covered in the "standard" formulas? If you have to tell the physician that they had better call a "real" physicist, who took a differential equations class, then you're not doing your job.

Radiobiology is not physics.

To the physicist, a human being is just an irregularly shaped bag of water with a few heterogeneities, right?

An unfortunately reductionist viewpoint of the human body.

We don't ever have to account for tissue tolerances when checking treatment plans, or estimate dosimetric uncertainties based on patient motion, or assist physicians with contouring, or write up clinical protocols and procedures, or fuse anatomical images.

None of which are physics.

In fact an argument could be made that medical physicists know more about anatomy and physiology than physicians in some medical disciplines.

This is a joke, right?

I would close by saying that just because we aren't working on a neutrino oscillation problems, does not mean that medical physicists aren't doing physics.

To which I would add: just because you are solving mathematical problems or doing research doesn't mean you *are* doing physics.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Um, qball? Who are you to tell Choppy (or anyone else) that what they do is or is not physics? I didn't know you held claim to the subject.

 

[Choppy]

Solving engineering problems does not make you a physicist.
Electrical engineering is not physics.
Radiobiology is not physics.

You must have a VERY narrow view of what physics is and what it means to be a physicist. Are you one of those types who believes that condensed matter physicists don't do physics either?

Engineering is a profession that directly derives from the application of physics to real world problems. (I mean, last I checked, engineers had to take some pretty rigorous physics classes. I know I'm getting older, but have things really changed that much?)

The question, maybe, is where one defines the border between physics and engineering. Whenever you have to explore the physics behind a problem to derive a solution, you're DOING physics. Yes engineers do this as a part of what they do. Physicists, professional ones anyway, are those who specialize in this process, often to the point of going so far as to formulate new theories and laws.

With respect to radiobiology not being physics, I suspect you're thinking along the lines of survival curves. You should look up the words "microdosimetry" and "nanodosimetry." Or better yet, try to figure out why it is Monte Carlo approaches to these calculations almost always use a medium of density-scaled water vapor rather than water.

None of which are physics.

In your rush to retort, you must have missed the spot where I was arguing these were aspects of medicine (radiation oncology specifically), not physics.

This is a joke, right?

Not at all. When you take someone who spends a career studying medical images, and compare him or her with someone who spent 4 years in medical school and then specialized in something like psychiatry I think the MD would have some pretty hearty competition.

Good luck on your quals.