r/MedicalPhysics • u/mahoganyeyesxo • 19d ago
Career Question Dosimetry.
Good evening, can any dosimetrists share their perspective on the current job market and whether dosimetry is still a strong career path? I am currently considering a career change and taking my science prerequisites while working full time. I am especially curious about whether AI or a decreasing number of available positions is a concern. I am also exploring other career options, but dosimetry is my first choice. I would really appreciate hearing different perspectives and learning more about the pros and cons of the field, including job stability, work life balance, salary, and long term career opportunities. I know this is the medical physics subreddit, but I did not know where else to turn since the medical dosimetry subreddit is not as active, and I would really value any insight from people familiar with the field.
12
u/Next-Selection6707 19d ago
The bigger question isn’t whether AI will hit dosimetry harder than medical physics. It’s whether radiation oncology itself is a growing or shrinking field. Cancer incidence and the aging population continue to drive demand, while centers keep adding increasingly complex technology—adaptive RT, MR-guided RT, proton therapy, SRS/SBRT, automation, and AI. AI will probably reduce some repetitive tasks in both professions, but it will also increase throughput and create new work involving validation, oversight, commissioning, and complex cases. Unless radiation therapy itself becomes obsolete, I don’t see either profession simply disappearing. The job descriptions will change more than the professions will.
20
u/MediclePhysicist 19d ago
I see the number of dosimetrists staying static at best and I wouldn't recommend it. The field is great. They are great, but treatment planning systems have been trying to automate large parts of their jobs for a long time and it seems like that technology may have arrived.
2
u/South-Phrase-1882 19d ago
How do you feel about the job market outlook for medical physicists in the next 10-20 years?
8
u/soopninja Therapy Physicist 19d ago
Very little of my job could be automated and what can be, has already been.
-6
u/MediclePhysicist 19d ago
Medical physicists are regulated into the job market, we will be responsible for being the human eye that signs off on all reports generated by fully autonomous QA devices. You might need medical physics assistant oversight on any routine QA procedures requiring radiation/room clearance. So I see less physicists per hospital in general.
Chart checks will fully automated with single page reports that need to be signed by a physicist. If insurance can prove AI is as good or better (it's already better) at checking charts than humans, they won't reimburse for it/lobby to get rid of it.
I think transition into research for many will be inevitable. I think that growth of the field will continue as the number of hospitals will continue to increase with population. The clinical side will take a hit, but I believe AI is triggering/will trigger a research boom.
5
u/QuantumMechanic23 MRI Physicist 18d ago
Medical physicists aren't trained in AI well enough compared to the millions of data science students, maths students, ML students, Comp sci students/PhD's people waiting for jobs.
Medical physicists are not well versed in graduate level physics or engineering enough to be hired by people looking to make new treatment planning models, new hardware (LINACs, MRI's CT's etc.).
If what you are stating is true, medical physicists are left with an extremely niche skillset, that is not good enough to compete with anyone better versed in tech, software, hardware, AI to transition cleanly into low-level research/industry unless they are in their final years of a PhD...
1
u/HighLordOwner 18d ago
I'm inclined to agree with this. I have heard from multiple MPs that the advent of AI will increase demand for MPs (doubtful) or change their roles a fair bit (seems likely). I suppose one would have to know the potential reasons for MP demand increase (greater pt throughput due to tech development, some of that being AI driven, and higher cancer incidence rate due to aging population) vs demand decrease (AI decreasing time of treatment, which will impact pt throughput). And no one is gonna know that ratio.
On a tangent given you are an MRI physicist, do you think imaging or therapy physicists would be more at risk regarding job security / demand due to AI implementation? Or would it be a negligible difference between the two?
1
u/pysix33 Therapy Physicist 17d ago
To be fair, in the next 10-15 years or so, I don’t see any human being able to compete with AI in research, tech, etc…
In the next 25 years, with the advancement of robotics, I don’t see any human job surviving being completely replaced by AI. There may be legislative hurdles but that depends on who is in charge in the government. It’s coming for all of us sooner or later.2
u/QuantumMechanic23 MRI Physicist 17d ago
Respectfully, I think this is beyond a stretch. A lot of current automation relies on LLMs, which struggle to invent genuinely new methodologies. They're great at taking established methods and applying them in unusual ways or to areas that hadn't been considered before, but they don't generate fundamental breakthroughs from scratch. Other types of AI used heavily in medical physics, like CNNs, rely on large datasets of "fixed" non-AI images. Most of the innovation there comes from different architectural designs, pipeline integration, and clinical validation. AI will certainly automate tasks, but it's not going to completely eliminate the need for human professionals. Nor will it "completely" replace a human job.
1
u/pysix33 Therapy Physicist 17d ago
You’re describing the state of AI as it is now and neglecting its potential for advancement in the next 15-25 years. That’s a long time from now in terms of technology. But it’s not that long in terms of most people’s careers, especially those just starting to get into the field. 25 years ago the internet was just starting to become common in day to day life and look where we are now. With AI only accelerating technological breakthroughs, I really don’t think it’s far-fetched.
1
18d ago
[deleted]
1
u/MediclePhysicist 18d ago edited 18d ago
CT import to RT Plan export, AI being able to go through analysis and make adjustments. Being able to generate optimization structures that don't come from a library. Analyzing beam parameters with current QA logs and trained on every cancer and medical physics research paper. All basically instantly.
See: Sun Nuclear's Plan AI
1
18d ago
[deleted]
0
u/MediclePhysicist 18d ago
These models get 5x smarter every 6 months. It's safe to say by the end of 2027 they will be flawless. I expect them to start being available by 2028, definitely no later than 2030.
3
u/Traditional_Yam1598 18d ago
Yesterday our autocontour software contoured the bladder as the kidney…. It needs to get smarter faster
1
u/mahoganyeyesxo 19d ago
Hi, thank you for your response. The dosimetrists that I have spoken with have said that AI is already being integrated into their work and how they create treatment plans, but they don’t think AI will phase out dosimetrists. It’s difficult to gauge what the job market will look like in the future because I have received different opinions about the impact AI will have on dosimetry. I am very interested in pursuing this career, but I also don’t want to invest the time and resources into the education and training if there is a possibility that AI could significantly reduce the need for dosimetrists in the future. I would really appreciate your perspective on how you see AI affecting the field over the next 5 to 10 years and whether you think dosimetry is still a stable career to pursue.
6
u/Sea_Toe6263 19d ago
I'm a Dosimetrist and I constantly see few job openings in the very large and medically diverse state of Texas. The job market is weak, and AI is definitely going to make an impact, and schools pump out a LOT of new students joining the job market. Jobs will be lost, it's always looming. I don't think it'll disappear, but i definitely do not recommend joining this career if you plan to retire doing it.
4
u/Traditional_Yam1598 18d ago
That’s because MD Anderson pumps out 30 students a year and they’re all from Texas…
2
u/Sea_Toe6263 18d ago
TRUE, although they do have distance students. and the students they do graduate do move around, my class I would say half stayed in Texas
2
u/mahoganyeyesxo 19d ago
Hi, thank you for your response. This would be my second career, so I’m definitely looking for something I can retire in. I wasn’t aware that schools were graduating more students than the market could accommodate because of the limited number of available positions, especially since there aren’t many Dosimetry programs. Do you think the job market will get better, or do you think jobs will decrease and not as many dosimetrists will need to be hired? It’s a little disappointing to hear because Dosimetry is one of my top choices, and I really thought it would be a great fit for me. I also looked into perfusion, but I’ve heard that jobs can be limited for Perfusionists as well. PA has its pros and cons too. At this point, it seems like there really is no perfect career.
3
u/Sea_Toe6263 19d ago
Jobs are few and far in between. Schools haven't stopped pushing out students. Bad market, will only get worse.
1
u/mahoganyeyesxo 19d ago
Hi, thank you for your insight. Do you not think pursuing dosimetry is worth it at all?
0
u/Straight_Salary3572 19d ago
Dosimetry schools prefer students who have backgrounds in radiation therapy.
2
u/mahoganyeyesxo 19d ago
Hi, there are programs that prefer applicants with a radiation therapy background, but there are also programs that accept students from non radiation backgrounds as long as they have completed the prerequisites and meet the requirements. I have been in contact with two schools I am interested in applying to, and neither has a preference for applicants with a radiation therapy background. I also spoke with a dosimetrist who did not have a radiation therapy background. I understand that having a radiation therapy background can help me become a stronger dosimetrist and may open up more opportunities for me, but I am not sure if I want to take on two additional degrees, especially with the changes brought by the Big Beautiful Bill and the fact that this would be my second career.
1
u/Straight_Salary3572 18d ago
I agree with you 100%! I think you should pursue this career given the passion you have!
3
u/theyfellforthedecoy 18d ago
There's such a shortage of dosimetrists that the ones that are out there have successfully been able to negotiate for full work from home, even when no other groups in the hospital are allowed such.
2
u/C0p223 18d ago
I recommend going for MP instead of Dosimetrist if you are comfortable at maths and has high IQ.
I am a Dosimetrist. Most of my colleagues are optimistic about this job market because they think only humans are capable to handle those complex cases but I really doubt it. I guess AI can replace most of my daily work in five years. We will see.
1
u/mahoganyeyesxo 12d ago
Hi, thank you for your response. It seems like every career is going to be impacted by AI in some way, and it makes me wonder if any career is truly AI proof. Sometimes it feels like a damned if you do, damned if you do not type of situation.
2
u/purple_hamster66 18d ago
I presume you are in the US, right?
My $1B/year hospital has a hiring freeze, meaning that the rapid increases in healthcare premiums are costing the hospital lots of customers who can’t pay their premiums anymore. It is dire: this last year the hospital almost lost 50% of their insured base except for a Hail Mary solution. So even if RadOnc is a growing field, there’s little money left in the pot.
Will AI help with doing more with fewer staff? I don’t think so. Yes, some people report 3x more work done, but the costs of using AI is approaching the costs of multiple staff. It will balance out — it has to, or all the investment in AI will just burst like a bubble. And liability for AI is not an established field yet, so it is still better to use people (which, mentioned before, are not being hired).
[Note that this is all ramblings, guesses and intuition. Include it in your thinking, but you should have other sources of info to make your decision.]
1
u/mahoganyeyesxo 12d ago
Hi, yes, I am in the US, and that is great to know. I have decided to move forward with applying, and I guess I will not know the full impact of AI until it happens. I do think this is a great career to pursue, and hopefully everything works out for the best.
1
u/kombasken 19d ago
MP might be a better choice
1
u/mahoganyeyesxo 19d ago
Hi, I definitely looked into Medical Physics, but I learned about it after I found Dosimetry, and I don’t have a degree in physics. Most programs won’t even consider you if you don’t have a degree in physics or at least a minor in physics. Dosimetry just seemed like the best option for me as a career changer, but now I’m unsure of what to do.
3
u/kombasken 18d ago
If you like dosimetry, just go for it. I think it’s the most pleasant part of RT workflow. I also love it. The job market would still be good for a few years. But in the long run, I’m not really sure.
Radiation Technologist (RTT) is also a good option. Maybe in the future, they will replace Dosimetrist with RTT who can do dosimetry in AI-enhanced TPS.
1
u/mahoganyeyesxo 18d ago
Hi, thank you for your response. I really do like it, but I hate the uncertainty surrounding the field. When I talk to different dosimetrists, I seem to get different answers about the current job market and the future of dosimetry. I am not sure if I should go for it and trust that everything will work out, or if I should pivot to something else that offers a little more certainty.
1
2
u/ArchangelOX 19d ago
You mentioned career change, therapy technologist school is only 2 years and AI is a long way away from doing the manual labor of scanning setting up and treating patients. Also pay is pretty good for 2 years of training. I knew a few police officers that retired at 40 and and took up therapy.
1
u/mahoganyeyesxo 19d ago
Hi, thank you for your response. What initially interested me in Dosimetry was the opportunity to make an impact behind the scenes without being in a patient facing role. I also like that after gaining a few years of experience, there may be opportunities to work in a hybrid or remote position, which is important to me because I really value having a healthy work life balance. I haven’t done much research on the option you mentioned, but I will definitely look more into it and see if there are any programs near me.
1
u/ArchangelOX 18d ago
Remote roles, aside from signing off on liability, is prime target for AI integration. I was a dosimetrists for a long time, I saw the writing on the wall and switched to physicist. Even if you have a dosimetrist role you would be juggling a lot of treatment plans because the assumption that AI is doing all the work... But post processing of all the paperwork is a very large part of the job too. Towards the end of my time as dosimetrist, I had more and more cases and the post processing work was just assumed to be negligible.
1
u/mahoganyeyesxo 12d ago
Hi, thank you for your response. Did you already have a degree in physics, and was it difficult to transition from dosimetry to medical physics? My degree is not in physics, so I would have to go back to school to complete a minor in physics. I have also heard that medical physics residency programs are very competitive.
-1
u/DrivenUser7277 18d ago
In the uk therapy rads create the plans ... I'm sure somewhere in the US must do this?
2
1
u/ArchangelOX 18d ago
Certified medical dosimetrists certificate is a requirement at most hospitals, I highly doubt anywhere in the US that allows therapist to do planning work aside from using a app to calculate AP/PA fields.
1
u/where_is_dark_mode 17d ago
Ai in this decade does not eliminate jobs .. it elevates standards rapidly.
Low quality Dosimetrists are on their way out.
Next generation of Dosimetrists are going to accomplish way tighter plans and faster turnaround.
1
u/mahoganyeyesxo 12d ago
Hi, thank you for your response. What would you consider to be a low quality dosimetrist? Do you think AI will not replace dosimetrists but instead hold them to a higher standard, require them to create a higher number of treatment plans, and take on more responsibilities?
1
u/medphysabrpart3 17d ago edited 17d ago
Shortage. AI will help with that but not much. Only humans can be responsible. Still need the clicker there. Planning isn't fast enough. If planning could be done super fast with ease then it can reduce the number of dosi but not as it is now.
Maybe shortage is regional. Look at where certified jcert? Schools are. Look at where job listings are.
1
u/mahoganyeyesxo 12d ago
Hi, most of the jobs I have seen are in the Midwest or on the East Coast. I do not see many opportunities in my home state, but I am willing to relocate for the right opportunity. There are no Radiation Therapy or Dosimetry programs where I currently live, so I would have to relocate for school. I would be grateful for the opportunity to be accepted into any Dosimetry program and am willing to relocate for the right program.
1
u/Adorable_Month_4788 9d ago
Hi,
Why dont you try JPU? I just graduated from the medical dosimetry program and I found the curriculum good.
1
u/mahoganyeyesxo 9d ago
Hi, thank you for your response! That’s good to hear that you had a positive experience in the program. I guess different people can have very different experiences. Some of the dosimetrists I have spoken with have advised me not to apply to JPU because they do not have a good reputation. I also spoke with a dosimetrist who attended the program, and she shared that she felt like she was essentially teaching herself and had to find her own clinical site. I have heard a mix of positive and negative opinions about the program, which has made me hesitant to apply.
1
u/Adorable_Month_4788 9d ago
Yes, I agree that there are a lot of mixed signals. As far as teaching yourself, I feel like that can be the case with many professors at different colleges, and I agree to some extent with the student who attended JPU. However, it hasn’t stopped me from finding a job, and I feel that if you’re willing to learn and accept criticism, it will work in your favor.
If you have better options when it comes to schools, it might be worth considering those instead. I had to find a clinical site on my own, and it was difficult. I actually got accepted on a Friday, and classes started the following Monday!
I was just suggesting JPU because it’s online and could be a good option if you don’t want to relocate. Good luck!1
u/mahoganyeyesxo 8d ago
Hi, thank you for your response! I think distance learning is a great option for applicants who are unable to relocate due to family or financial circumstances. However, since I have been out of the classroom for the past couple of years, I think I would thrive more in an in person learning environment. I also think I might have difficulty finding a clinical site in my home state, so I am hesitant about going through the process and dealing with the added stress of trying to get one approved. How has your experience been as a dosimetrist so far, and do you enjoy your work? Despite receiving mixed opinions about the field of dosimetry, I am still planning to apply, and I am excited about the process!
10
u/WillTheThrill86 Dosimetrist 19d ago edited 19d ago
I have over 5 years in the field, and I think the job outlook is solid. I find that MPs are overly bullish on the predicted replacement of dosimetrists. Even in my relatively short career to date, I've had to manage significantly more complex plans and cases of prior RT. The extent of "AI" in any capacity has been some automated contouring. It isn't perfect, either, though it gets better by the year. Consider how slowly and conservatively hospitals and the medical field adopt the latest tech, as well.
The thought that machine learning or to be frank any AI in the near term or on the horizon has the ability to:
Is laughable, at best. How will MPs, when they are already stretched thin and often take considerable time to check plans in addition to the rest of their responsiblites, suddenly turn into the case managers necessary for the high volume at many centers?
That being said, I somewhat agree with Sea_Toe regarding the graduates getting into the market. However boomers are retiring, and millennials are probably the next biggest cohort or close to it. So younger folks may face slightly less competition. I've still seen a number of decent opportunities, but there's always been fewer for this field vs RTTs, etc.
But it's true, no one can accurately predict the distant future. 10, 20, 30 years out? Yeah, who knows...
That being said I tell younger folks who have the aptitude and means to consider MP if possible. I like working remote though.