HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 2363041885v1 236/3/932    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Meghea, C. I. Articles by Sunshine, J. H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Meghea, C. I. Articles by Sunshine, J. H.

Who's Overworked and Who's Underworked among Radiologists? An Update on the Radiologist Shortage¹

¹ From the Research Department, American College of Radiology, 1891 Preston White Dr, Reston, VA 20191. Received November 5, 2004; revision requested January 4, 2005; revision received January 26; accepted February 3. Address correspondence to C.I.M. (e-mail: cristianm{at}acr.org).

	ABSTRACT

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION References

 
PURPOSE: To use weighted data and information on hours worked to investigate further the market for radiology services by analyzing the extent to which radiologists wanted less or more work in 2003.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Weighted data were used from the American College of Radiology's 2003 Survey of Radiologists. A statement on the survey cover sheet indicated that responses would not be individually identified, and responses were processed by an outside contractor for enhanced assurance of confidentiality. The authors analyzed workloads and the desired workload changes for radiologists who wanted less work, those who wanted more work, and those who sought no change in their workload. Multivariate regression analysis was also used to identify the probable causal links between characteristics of radiologists and the practices they work in and their desire for a workload change.

RESULTS: The net average workload change sought was approximately 0.1% of the current workload and was not significantly different from zero, indicating that the overall total workload is what is desired. However, radiologists working in academic or government practices sought 4% and 12% more work, respectively, while those in private practices sought 2% less. In addition, radiologists working in nonmetropolitan practices sought 3% less work than those in large metropolitan areas.

CONCLUSION: There was an overall balance between the demand and the supply of radiologists in 2003. The authors found some imbalances, including surpluses in academic and government-owned practices, a shortage of radiologists in private radiology groups, and a shortage in nonmetropolitan areas. There were differences in radiologists' desired workload by sex, age, and type and location of practice.

© RSNA, 2005

	INTRODUCTION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION References

 
The relationship between the supply of radiologists and the demand for their services has varied in past decades (1–8). Only a few years ago, as the 21st century began, there was a severe shortage of radiologists, which was projected to worsen (9). Recently, the situation had changed substantially, with all indicators pointing to an easing of the shortage and some suggesting its disappearance (10). Among the indicators, preliminary tabulation of unweighted data from the American College of Radiology's 2003 Survey of Radiologists suggested that supply and demand were in close balance (10). The purpose of our study, therefore, was to use weighted data and information on hours worked to investigate further the market for radiology services, analyzing the extent to which radiologists wanted less or more work in 2003; we assume that the desire for less work indicates a shortage of radiologists while the desire for more work suggests a surplus.

	MATERIALS AND METHODS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION References

 
The Survey
Data are from the American College of Radiology's 2003 Survey of Radiologists, a nationally representative stratified random sample of all radiologists in the United States that has been described in detail elsewhere (11,12). In brief, the survey was conducted by mail between March and July 2003 and covered a broad range of topics. A statement on the survey cover sheet said that responses would not be individually identified, and responses were processed by an outside contractor for enhanced assurance of confidentiality. With up to four remailings to nonrespondents, and other reminders, the survey achieved an overall response rate of 63%, including 1346 responses from posttraining, professionally active radiologists.

Of greatest interest to this study, the survey asked radiologists how their workload compares with the one they desire. The three answer options provided were "about right," "I'd like my work and my income reduced by about __%," and "I'd like my work and my income increased by about __%." By tying workload so overtly to income we sought to maximize the realism of the answers and the rate of response to this question: 94% of the respondents in our sample answered this question. In addition, an earlier question in the survey made it clear that, in addition to clinical practice, workload also included administrative duties, research, and teaching, but not professional society meetings. In this study, overwork and underwork were defined as changes in workload sought if income were to change accordingly.

The respondents were classified into five age groups: less than 35, 35–44, 45–54, 55–64, and 65 years old or over. The survey also asked respondents for their main subspecialty, their weekly hours, the number of separate locations at which they work, whether they are an owner of their main practice, and whether they work full time or part time.

There were also questions regarding characteristics of the main practice of the radiologist: the census region of the practice (Northeast, Midwest, South, and West); the type of location (large metropolitan [population, >1 000 000], small metropolitan [population between 50 000 and 1 000 000], or nonmetropolitan [population, <50 000]); and practice type (solo; academic; nonacademic private, multispecialty; nonacademic, government; nonacademic, private radiology; or other).

Analysis Methods
Our study excluded trainees, retirees, and others not working in radiology. Survey responses were weighted for different sampling rates and response rates to make the data representative of what answers would have been if all radiologists in the United States had been surveyed and had responded. Reported means, standard errors, tests of statistical significance, and regression coefficients were calculated, taking into account not only the weighted nature of the data but also the complex survey design, that is, the fact that there were three distinct physician strata in our data set (osteopathic radiologists, radiologists self-designated as vascular/interventional radiologists in the American Medical Association's Physician Masterfile, and all other allopathic radiologists).

For a broad answer to the question of whether radiologists feel overworked, descriptive statistics were analyzed, using the workloads and desired workload changes for all radiologists, by dividing them into three groups: those who wanted less work, those who wanted more work, and those who sought no change in their workload. Weekly and annual hours, the overall desired change in workload in percentage and in hours, the weekly and annual desired workloads, and the percentage of part-time workers in each of the three groups were determined.

For the remaining analyses, which dealt with categories of radiologists, annual rather than weekly hours were used because annual hours capture both the weekly workload and the number of weeks worked annually by the respondents. Data were analyzed for radiologists who do not subspecialize, for radiologists who do subspecialize, for individual subspecialties, by sex, by practice type, and by practice location, so as to provide evidence on shortages or surpluses associated with particular characteristics of the radiologist and the practice.

Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to determine the probable causal links between characteristics of radiologists and the practices they work in and their desire for a change in annual workload. Regression analysis is used to identify the independent effect of each factor considered, such as the radiologist's subspecialty or the practice type, on the desired workload change, statistically controlling for the effects of all other variables included (all other factors being held constant). By controlling for the effects of the other characteristics, we are more likely to identify which factors have a causal effect on differences in desired workload changes.

The dependent variable in the regression analysis is the individual's desired change in annual hours worked. The explanatory variables are the annual hours worked for those working full time, the full- or part-time status of the respondent, age, sex, specialty, whether or not the respondent was an owner in the practice, and the number of locations where the respondent worked. In addition to individual characteristics, we considered the location of the practice in a metropolitan or nonmetropolitan area, the census region, and the type of practice.

To investigate further some unexpected regression results, the annual hours worked and the numbers of vacation days of full-time radiologists were tabulated by practice type. To ascertain the extent to which the factors that were found significant in the regression analysis explain why some categories of radiologists wanted significant changes in their average annual workload, we (J.H.S. and C.I.M.) also examined the correlation between the changes desired according to category and the category-level desired change predicted by means of a regression analysis that uses only the significant factors.

For comparisons of means, statistical tests were conducted to determine whether differences between groups were significant at P .05. Regression coefficients were considered significantly different from zero when the P value was .10 or less. Statistical tests at this P value cutoff are the standard in the health economics literature. More restrictive tests at P .05 were used because the standard deviations are relatively small in the univariate analyses.

	RESULTS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION References

 
Balance of Supply and Demand
Does data analysis show a close balance of supply and demand?

Weighted data (Table 1) indicate that similar percentages of all radiologists reported they wanted less work (17%) and more work (16%). Radiologists who wanted to work less wished for a 21% decrease in workload, on average, while those who wanted more work wished for a 26% increase. Translating these percentages into physician hours, the desired changes in hours worked weekly were 12 hours (decrease) and 13 hours (increase). In annual hours, the desired decrease and increase were 501 and 546 hours, respectively. The average desired workload increase and decrease were not significantly different (P > .05) in either weekly or annual hours.

Working Hours of Radiologists Seeking Change in Workload
Were the radiologists who wanted a reduction in workload working longer hours than others, and were those who wanted an increase in workload working relatively few hours? Were there relatively more (less) part-time workers among the radiologists seeking more (less) work?

Radiologists seeking less work averaged 54 hours a week, which was significantly more (P .05) than the hours worked by those satisfied with their typical working week (Table 1). Those desiring an increased workload averaged 49 hours weekly, which was not significantly different (P > .05) from the 47 hours a week reported by the radiologists who stated that they worked about the right amount. Annually, radiologists seeking less work had worked an average of 2283 hours, which was a significantly larger annual workload (P .05) than the 1964 hours averaged by radiologists satisfied with their workload. Those desiring an increased workload averaged 2064 hours per year, which was also significantly more (P .05) than the workload of radiologists who stated that they worked the right amount.

The average weekly workload desired by radiologists seeking to work less was 42 hours (54 – 12 hours), while those seeking to work more wanted, on average, a 62-hour working week (49 + 13 hours). The preferred weekly workloads of the radiologists seeking more and those seeking less work were both significantly different from the "about right" workload of 47 hours (P .05). Similarly, the preferred annual workloads of radiologists satisfied with their hours were different among the three categories of radiologists.

Overall, 16% of respondents were part-time radiologists. Approximately 21% of radiologists seeking less work were employed part time, compared with only 11% of those desiring more work (the two fractions of part-time radiologists were not significantly different; P > .05). Eight percent of the radiologists satisfied with their workload were part-time workers; the percentage of part-time workers among radiologists satisfied with their workload was significantly different from both the percentage of part-time radiologists seeking less work and the percentage of those seeking more work (P .05).

Differences among Subspecialties
Are there differences among subspecialties in the extent to which radiologists desire less or more work?

Approximately one-third of radiologists said that they do not subspecialize even to a small extent. Nineteen percent of that group sought less work, and 14% sought more (Table 2). The overall net average change in the workload wanted by nonsubspecialist radiologists was a decrease of 21 hours a year, which equals approximately 1% of their typical annual workload of 1928 hours.

For nine radiology subspecialties, there were some differences across fields (Table 2). The largest differences from the general pattern were displayed in the fields of musculoskeletal and pediatric radiology. Fourteen percent of the musculoskeletal radiologists reported a desire for less work, while only 4% wished for an increased workload, and the net average workload change sought was a decrease of 70 hours a year. Eighteen percent of the pediatric radiologists sought less work, while only 8% wanted more work, and the net average workload change desired was a decrease of 11 hours a year. The numbers of musculoskeletal and pediatric radiologists in our data set were fairly small—42 musculoskeletal radiologists and 38 pediatric radiologists—and the desired workload changes in those groups were not significantly different from zero (P > .05).

For the subspecialty of body imaging, the net average desired change in workload was an increase of 49 hours a year (Table 2), but, again, the sample size was small, and the desired change was not significantly different from zero (P > .05). Overall, the net average workload change sought in each of the subspecialties was not significantly different from zero (P > .05).

Other Characteristics of Radiologists Seeking Change in Workload
Are there other characteristics frequent among radiologists who want a decreased (or those who want an increased) workload?

Thirty percent of the solo practitioners wanted an increased workload, while only 10% wished to work less. The net average desired workload change was an increase of 77 hours a year, which is not significantly different from zero (P > .05), but the sample size was small. In a somewhat similar pattern, 18% of radiologists working in academic practices wanted more work, while 11% sought less, for a net average desired increase in workload of 83 hours a year; this was a statistically significant workload change (P .05).

No radiologists working in nonacademic government practices sought less work, while 31% wanted more work. The overall average workload increase sought was 246 hours a year, which was 12% of the typical workload of 2013 hours a year, a statistically significant increase (P .05). The situation was reversed in private nonacademic radiology practices: 23% of the radiologists wanted less work and only 14% sought more work, for an overall desired decrease of 52 hours per year, which was also a significant change (P .05).

Data were analyzed according to the location of the practice: large metropolitan area (population, 1 000 00), small metropolitan area (population between 50 000 and 1 000 000), or nonmetropolitan area (population, <50 000 or rural). There was little variation across locations, with the exception of radiologists working in nonmetropolitan practices. Fifteen percent of these radiologists sought more work, a result similar to that for metropolitan locations, but 25% wanted less work, compared with 14% and 18% in large and small metropolitan areas, respectively. On average, radiologists working in nonmetropolitan practices sought a significant (P .05) decrease in annual workload of 58 hours. The net average desired workload changes for radiologists working in large and small metropolitan areas were not significantly different from zero, nor was the net average desired workload change (Table 2) for each of the four census regions (for both, P > .05).

Eighty-three percent of posttraining, professionally active radiologists were men. Approximately 17% of male radiologists said they wanted to work less, and 17% reported a desire for a workload increase. Overall, the net average desired workload change was an increase of 2 hours a year, which was a very small fraction of the typical workload of 2102 annual hours and was not significantly different from zero (P > .05). Fifteen percent of female radiologists wanted to work less, while 10% wished for a workload increase. The overall average workload change sought was a decrease of 1 hour a year, which was not significantly different from zero (P > .05).

Factors That May Explain Imbalances in the Radiology Services Market
What are the factors associated with the desire for less or more work that may explain the imbalances in the radiology services market?

Age, sex, number of hours worked, practice location, and practice type influenced the desire for a change in workload (Table 3). When other factors were held constant—including hours worked—radiologists less than 35 years old sought a workload change of 166 hours a year more (P .10) than the change sought by 45–54-year-old radiologists, the reference category. Radiologists 55–64 years of age wanted a workload change of 60 hours a year less (P .10) than the change sought by the reference category. Women wanted to change their workload by 70 hours a year (P .05) less than the men did.

Working in a nonmetropolitan area was associated with a desire for a smaller increase in workload. When other factors—including hours worked—were held constant, radiologists in nonmetropolitan practices wanted an increase in annual workload smaller by 69 hours compared with those in large metropolitan areas.

When other factors—including hours worked—were held constant, radiologists working as solo practitioners in academic practices, in nonacademic multispecialty practices, and in government-owned practices all sought larger increases in annual workload relative to that in the reference category of radiologists in private, nonacademic radiology groups. The increase in workload desired by radiologists employed in multispecialty practices was 40 hours larger than that sought by those in the reference group (P .10). Solo practitioners sought an annual increase 162 hours greater than that sought by those in the reference group (P .05). Radiologists working in academic and in government practices sought larger annual increases than those in the reference group, by 134 and 384 hours a year, respectively (P .01).

Table 4 presents the observed mean changes in annual hours sought and the mean changes predicted with the regression, by practice type and by location, and the weights for each subgroup of radiologists, that is, the fraction of all radiologists working in each type of practice or practice location. The weighted correlation coefficient for the observed and predicted changes in annual hours sought by practice type is 0.99. The weighted correlation coefficient by practice location is also 0.99.

	DISCUSSION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION References

As expected, we found that radiologists who wanted less work currently averaged significantly more annual hours than did the ones who were not seeking a change. Contrary to our expectations, we also found that radiologists seeking more work were already averaging somewhat more hours per year than were those reporting that their hours were about right. Overall, we interpret these findings as an indication that different opinions about desired changes in workload reflect more than just differences in the current numbers of hours worked.

In addition, if different opinions about desired changes in workload were due only to differences in hours worked among the three groups (radiologists seeking more work, seeking less work, or satisfied with their workload), we would have expected to see similar desired workloads in the three categories of radiologists. The desired workloads were different, with the average desired annual hours lowest for those who wanted a decreased workload and the desired workload highest—approximately 47% higher—among those wanting an increase in workload. We consider this additional evidence that differences in attitudes toward workload changes reflect more than just differences in hours currently worked. Further evidence for this conclusion is in the regression finding that, when other factors are controlled for, radiologists working 100 more hours annually do want more of a reduction in workload, but the difference in desired reduction, approximately 9 hours, is only a small fraction of the difference in current workload. This suggests that as much as 90% of the current differences in radiologists' work hours are desired and are not imposed by the happenstance of the jobs in which radiologists find themselves.

We found that the highest share of part-time workers was among radiologists seeking less work, which was the reverse of our expectations. This suggests that among part-time radiologists, there are few involuntarily working part time because they cannot find a full-time job. Rather, there seem to be a good many part-time radiologists who not only want to be working part time but even want to be working somewhat less than they currently are.

We analyzed the situation separately for subspecialists and nonsubspecialists and found that each of the two categories showed a very close balance. One reason there is good balance for both groups is the fact that most subspecialists do more than just work in their main subspecialty. Tabulations from the 2003 survey show that only one-third of subspecialists spend more than 75% of their clinical work time practicing in their main subspecialty. Thus, they can do more or less subspecialty work, depending on demand.

An overall balance for subspecialists does not guarantee balance within each individual subspecialty. We investigated the nine subspecialties for which our survey had the greatest number of respondents. Our ability to reliably identify modest-sized imbalances in individual subspecialties was limited by the relatively small number of respondents in many of these subspecialties, and we found no significant imbalance in any of them. However, we did find evidence suggestive of a small (<4%) shortage in pediatric radiology and musculoskeletal radiology and a small surplus in body imaging.

The univariate analysis by practice type indicates that radiologists working as solo practitioners or in academic or government practices were seeking more work, while those in private practices were seeking less. The results of regression analysis confirm this finding, showing that radiologists in these other types of practices seek a greater increase in workload than do those in private practice, after all other differences are controlled for, including differences in hours currently worked. The 3% of radiologists working in government practices seek a substantially larger increase in workload than do radiologists employed in all other types of practices. This may be due to the specifics of the government practices, for example, in the Veterans Health Administration system.

This finding is certainly contrary to a popular image of private practitioners as hard-working (even workaholic) entrepreneurs and of others as not as energetic. That image does not accord with radiologists' self-reports, which show approximately equal annual work hours for full-time radiologists in all types of practices—except academic practices, where the work hours are longer—and show that radiologists in private radiology practices and private multispecialty practices have approximately twice as many vacation days, on average, as those in government, academic, or solo practices.

However, explanations other than different tastes for work may also underlie differences among practice types in desired hours. For example, the intensity of work may be generally greater in private practices, leading radiologists in other types of practices to be more tolerant of longer hours. Alternatively, the lower incomes characteristic of academic and (perhaps) government practices may incline those working in these practices to work longer hours to help make up the income difference. We have scant empirical data on these points.

In any case, our findings regarding different types of practices do not accord with the widespread impression that private practices have lured away much of the academic workforce. On the contrary, and much to our surprise, we found something of a radiologist surplus in academia and a shortage in private practice. To be specific, in mid-2003, when the survey was conducted, academics were, on average, seeking more work (by 4%, on average), while private practitioners were seeking less (by 2%, on average). The situation may have been different 2–3 years earlier at the height of the radiologist shortage. We also found a shortage of radiologists in nonmetropolitan practices. In contrast, there seems to be no relative shortage or surplus in any particular census region.

The regression analysis provided additional findings. It showed that, when other factors were held constant (including full-time vs part-time status and work hours), the desire for work decreases with age, much as would be expected. Also, men seek approximately 3% more work hours than women. This difference probably reflects differences in family responsibilities still characteristic of our society. In addition, the significant variables in the regression analysis explain almost all of the mean desired changes in the workloads of radiologists (Table 4).

Limitations of the Study
The desire for more or less work is only one indicator (among others presented in reference 10) of potential surpluses or shortages in the market for radiology services. Moreover, our quantitative findings are based on the assumption that desired changes in workload are equal to desired changes in hours. If, instead, the desired changes are partly or wholly in the intensity of work, rather than in work hours, the implications of our quantitative findings would change somewhat. However, our qualitative results should be little affected, and areas of shortage or surplus would still be reliably identified.

The 2003 survey, the source of our data, had strengths and important limitations. Its limitations included imprecision due to sampling (measured as the standard errors presented in the tables for most statistics), possible response bias with respect to characteristics not considered in the weighting, and some residual implausible and probably erroneous data, despite the careful data cleaning. Also, the sample size was small for subspecialties, and the statistical power in analyses regarding them was therefore relatively low.

Another limitation of the survey was that it obtained relatively poor data on the weekly and annual work hours of part-time radiologists. To use as much information as possible, we estimated each individual part-time radiologist's weekly work hours as the reported typical hours worked by all part-time radiologists in their practices (this survey question produced more reliable data). We also assumed that part-time radiologists work the same mean number of weeks worked by all full-time respondents. While we gained useful information in the univariate analysis with this estimate, by including part-time workers in our regression analysis we lost variation in weeks worked and thus in annual hours. The loss in variation is the likely reason why hours were not a significant factor in the regression when all radiologists were considered, but they were significant when we limited the analysis to full-time radiologists.

The ability of the regression analysis to help identify causal links was decreased in our study by the possibility of a selection bias; that is, radiologists with a preference toward working fewer hours may choose practices associated with less demanding work schedules, for example, nonmetropolitan practices. If this is the case, the association between the desire for less work and the nonmetropolitan location would reflect a causal link from the former to the latter, and not the other way around, as we assume when interpreting the regression results.

Conclusions
Our analysis suggests there was an overall balance between the demand and the supply of radiologists in 2003, but within this overall balance, private practice radiologists reported themselves overworked by 2%, while radiologists in academic and government-owned practices sought 4% and 12% more work, respectively. As well, there was a shortage of radiologists in nonmetropolitan areas. We found differences in radiologists' desired workload by sex, age, and type and location of practice. These differences in desired workloads are the main explanations for the imbalances found.

	FOOTNOTES

 
Authors stated no financial relationship to disclose.

Author contributions: Guarantors of integrity of entire study, C.I.M., J.H.S.; study concepts/study design or data acquisition or data analysis/interpretation, C.I.M., J.H.S.; manuscript drafting or manuscript revision for important intellectual content and manuscript final version approval, C.I.M., J.H.S.; literature research, C.I.M., J.H.S.; statistical analysis, C.I.M.; manuscript editing, C.I.M., J.H.S.

	References

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION References

 

1. Brogdon BG. The radiology manpower equation: a new look. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990;154:1111–1115.[Free Full Text]
2. Smith WL. Factors affecting the future of diagnostic radiologists. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994;163:777–779.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
3. Garrison LP, Wills J, Perrin EB, Peterson ML. Physician requirements: 1990—for five hospital-based specialties. Final report under contract no. 232-81-0027. Seattle, Wash: Batelle Human Affairs Research Centers, 1982.
4. Graduate Medical Education National Advisory Committee. GMENAC's summary report. I. Publication no. HRA 81–651. Rockville, Md: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1980.
5. Janower M. Too many radiologists? Radiology 1973;108:219–221.[Medline]
6. National Advisory Committee on Radiation. Protecting and improving health through the radiological sciences: a report to the Surgeon General. Public Health Service publication. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1966.
7. Janower ML, Sunshine JH. Too many radiologists? Update. Radiology 1996;200:545–549.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
8. Sunshine JH, Evens RG, Chan WC. How accurate was GMENAC? A retrospective review of supply projections for diagnostic radiologists. Radiology 1992;182:365–368.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
9. Bhargavan M, Sunshine JH, Schepps B. Too few radiologists? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;178:1075–1082.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10. Sunshine JH, Maynard DC, Paros J, Forman HP. Update on the diagnostic radiologist shortage. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004;182:301–305.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
11. Bhargavan M, Sunshine JH. Workload of radiologists in the United States in 2002–2003 and trends since 1991–1992. Radiology 2005;236:920–931.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12. Sunshine JH, Lewis RS, Bhargavan M. A portrait of interventional radiologists. J Am Coll Radiol (in press).

This article has been cited by other articles:

				N. R. Nayak, C. Meghea, M. Bhargavan, H. P. Forman, and J. H. Sunshine Prevalence of Productivity-Enhancing Technologies in Radiology Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2008; 190(6): 1445 - 1452. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. M. Zafar, R. S. Lewis, and J. H. Sunshine Satisfaction of Radiologists in the United States: A Comparison between 2003 and 1995 Radiology, July 1, 2007; 244(1): 223 - 231. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. S. Lewis, M. Bhargavan, and J. H. Sunshine Women Radiologists in the United States: Results from the American College of Radiology's 2003 Survey Radiology, March 1, 2007; 242(3): 802 - 810. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. L. Ebbert, C. Meghea, S. Iturbe, H. P. Forman, M. Bhargavan, and J. H. Sunshine The State of Teleradiology in 2003 and Changes Since 1999 Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2007; 188(2): W103 - W112. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Meghea and J. H. Sunshine Retirement patterns and plans of radiologists. Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2006; 187(6): 1405 - 1411. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Merewitz and J. H. Sunshine A Portrait of Pediatric Radiologists in the United States Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2006; 186(1): 12 - 22. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. D. Saket, C. C. Nwanze, C. D. Maynard, J. H. Sunshine, and H. P. Forman Update on the Diagnostic Radiologist Employment Market: Findings Through 2004 Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2005; 185(6): 1408 - 1415. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 2363041885v1 236/3/932    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Meghea, C. I. Articles by Sunshine, J. H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Meghea, C. I. Articles by Sunshine, J. H.