2344 - Two-Year National Reassessment of Digital Resource Comprehensiveness among U.S. Radiation Oncology Residency Programs
Presenter(s)
D. J. Lee1, D. A. Cerbon2, C. S. Seldon Taswell3, D. Isrow4, W. Jin2, A. R. Mahal5, N. B. Newman6, M. Bredel7, C. Takita1, and B. A. Mahal8; 1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL, 2Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Miami/Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL, 3Department of Radiation Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, 4Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, 5Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, 6University of Miami, Miami, FL, 7Department of Radiation Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, FL, 8Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Department of Radiation Oncology, Boston, MA
Purpose/Objective(s):
Residency applicants often consult program websites and social media profiles to guide decisions. In 2024, we examined the websites of 88 recruiting U.S. radiation oncology residencies and found common deficiencies, especially in call responsibility and medical student away rotation information. The present two-year follow-up analysis evaluated where there have been subsequent improvments in website comprehensiveness and examined social media presence.Materials/Methods:
U.S. radiation oncology residencies recruiting in the 2026 Match were identified using NRMP and ACGME data. Program websites were assessed using 18 comprehensiveness criteria – including active Twitter/X and Instagram profiles (=1 post within 12 months prior to January 30, 2026) – by the same two independent reviewers as the 2024 study. Comprehensiveness was defined as the percentage of criteria present in each program’s digital resources. Secondary characteristics included ACGME accreditation, program size, 2026 Match spots, and Doximity alumni ratings. Comparisons between 2024 and 2026 were limited to programs recruiting in both cycles. Changes in overall digital resource comprehensiveness were assessed using Wilcoxon signed rank and paired t-tests; changes in individual criteria were assessed using McNemar tests. Associations between comprehensiveness and secondary characteristics were evaluated via multivariable linear regression.Results:
Eighty-three programs were identified (81 fully ACGME-accredited), with a median size of 7 residents (range=3-27) and 2 Match spots (range=2-7). Mean comprehensiveness was 83.3% (SD=11.5), compared with 76.2% in 2024 (Wilcoxon signed rank p=0.0007, paired t-test p=0.0003). Programs with >7 residents had more comprehensive digital resources than those with =7 residents (88.9% vs. 77.8%; p=0.0005). Programs with higher Doximity alumni ratings had more comprehensive digital resources (+7.50 pp per 1-star increase; p=0.0008). Relative to 2024, significantly improved presence of information on call responsibilities (26.5%?54.2% of websites; p<0.0001), salary/benefits (67.5%?92.8%; p=0.0001), application requirements/coordinator contact (88.0%?100%; p=0.002), and faculty biography (86.7%?97.6%; p=0.012) were found. Improvements were also found in educational content presence, including medical student away rotation (55.4?74.7%; p<0.0001) and resident didactics information (86.7%?94.0%; p=0.031). However, the presence of program video introductions declined (72.3%?59.0%; p=0.035). Active Twitter/X and Instagram profiles were present for just 59.0% and 47.0% of programs, respectively.Conclusion:
Digital resource comprehensiveness among U.S. radiation oncology residencies has significantly improved since 2024 in certain metrics. However, meaningful gaps in comprehensiveness persist, particularly with regard to video resources and social media presence.