American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) chapter climate check: Mixed methods analysis of survey responses

IF 2 4区医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING

Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics Pub Date : 2025-02-11 DOI:10.1002/acm2.14600

Ashley J. Cetnar, Ghada Aldosary, Meghan C. Koo, Holly Lincoln, Angélica Pérez-Andújar, Surendra Prajapati, Samantha J. Simiele, Kristi R. G. Hendrickson

{"title":"American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) chapter climate check: Mixed methods analysis of survey responses","authors":"Ashley J. Cetnar, Ghada Aldosary, Meghan C. Koo, Holly Lincoln, Angélica Pérez-Andújar, Surendra Prajapati, Samantha J. Simiele, Kristi R. G. Hendrickson","doi":"10.1002/acm2.14600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) recently shared results and recommendations from its first Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) Climate Survey, which was designed to assess the climate at the workplace, the AAPM organization, and the AAPM regional chapter level. This work further explores the status of EDI at the regional chapter level.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>AAPM's EDI Survey was distributed to 5500 members and had a response rate of 25%. In the survey, three open-ended comment boxes were provided for feedback, including one for regional AAPM members. Sixty-four percent of respondents indicated they were part of a regional chapter, and 6% provided written responses to the regional chapter question. Responses were analyzed using a mixed methods approach with an exploratory sequential design. Two phases were conducted; the first relied on a Grounded Theory quantitative systemic approach, and the second applied qualitative analysis. Chapter member demographic data were collected to support findings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Survey respondents provided open comments and feedback on their regional chapter's climate. Data are summarized as five themes: positive experiences, negative experiences, challenges within chapters, diversity and inclusion, and changes observed. Experiences of regional chapters were rated positively by 75% of respondents. Respondents found their chapters were welcoming, and some noted their great chapter leadership. A number of incidents of sexual harassment, bullying, and discrimination incidences were also shared. Other respondents observed exclusion based on their gender, race, highest degree, and medical physics specialty. Chapter leadership data aligned with these claims, with most leaders to-date being white males, doctoral degree holders, and/or specializing in radiation therapy.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>AAPM chapters provide rewarding professional opportunities. This study has highlighted positive and negative experiences reported by its members. The major themes identified can guide chapter leaders to continue to cultivate welcoming communities for regional AAPM members.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":14989,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","volume":"26 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acm2.14600","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acm2.14600","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) recently shared results and recommendations from its first Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) Climate Survey, which was designed to assess the climate at the workplace, the AAPM organization, and the AAPM regional chapter level. This work further explores the status of EDI at the regional chapter level.

Methods

AAPM's EDI Survey was distributed to 5500 members and had a response rate of 25%. In the survey, three open-ended comment boxes were provided for feedback, including one for regional AAPM members. Sixty-four percent of respondents indicated they were part of a regional chapter, and 6% provided written responses to the regional chapter question. Responses were analyzed using a mixed methods approach with an exploratory sequential design. Two phases were conducted; the first relied on a Grounded Theory quantitative systemic approach, and the second applied qualitative analysis. Chapter member demographic data were collected to support findings.

Results

Survey respondents provided open comments and feedback on their regional chapter's climate. Data are summarized as five themes: positive experiences, negative experiences, challenges within chapters, diversity and inclusion, and changes observed. Experiences of regional chapters were rated positively by 75% of respondents. Respondents found their chapters were welcoming, and some noted their great chapter leadership. A number of incidents of sexual harassment, bullying, and discrimination incidences were also shared. Other respondents observed exclusion based on their gender, race, highest degree, and medical physics specialty. Chapter leadership data aligned with these claims, with most leaders to-date being white males, doctoral degree holders, and/or specializing in radiation therapy.

Conclusion

AAPM chapters provide rewarding professional opportunities. This study has highlighted positive and negative experiences reported by its members. The major themes identified can guide chapter leaders to continue to cultivate welcoming communities for regional AAPM members.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics 医学-核医学

CiteScore

3.60

自引率

19.00%

发文量

331

审稿时长

3 months

期刊介绍： Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics is an international Open Access publication dedicated to clinical medical physics. JACMP welcomes original contributions dealing with all aspects of medical physics from scientists working in the clinical medical physics around the world. JACMP accepts only online submission. JACMP will publish: -Original Contributions: Peer-reviewed, investigations that represent new and significant contributions to the field. Recommended word count: up to 7500. -Review Articles: Reviews of major areas or sub-areas in the field of clinical medical physics. These articles may be of any length and are peer reviewed. -Technical Notes: These should be no longer than 3000 words, including key references. -Letters to the Editor: Comments on papers published in JACMP or on any other matters of interest to clinical medical physics. These should not be more than 1250 (including the literature) and their publication is only based on the decision of the editor, who occasionally asks experts on the merit of the contents. -Book Reviews: The editorial office solicits Book Reviews. -Announcements of Forthcoming Meetings: The Editor may provide notice of forthcoming meetings, course offerings, and other events relevant to clinical medical physics. -Parallel Opposed Editorial: We welcome topics relevant to clinical practice and medical physics profession. The contents can be controversial debate or opposed aspects of an issue. One author argues for the position and the other against. Each side of the debate contains an opening statement up to 800 words, followed by a rebuttal up to 500 words. Readers interested in participating in this series should contact the moderator with a proposed title and a short description of the topic