Trends in Pathology Fellowship Training; Speculation about the Job Market

A recent article on fellowship training in pathology got me thinking about the number of years of postgraduate training that is required for training in pathology and also the job market (see: 2011 Fellowship & Job Market Surveys), Below is an excerpt from the article:

Each year the ASCP Resident Council directs [a] survey on fellowships and the job market for pathologists in training, both residents and fellows....This year, 2,591 residents participated in the survey. Competition is tight for fellowships. Similar to both the 2009 and 2010 results, slightly more than half of residents (54 percent) received one fellowship offer; 21 percent received two fellowship offers. But 12 percent of applicants received no offers (up from 10 percent last year). While 59 percent of residents intend to complete one fellowship, 40 percent of residents intend to complete at least two fellowships, up from 38 and 36 percent in 2009 and 2010 respectively.  Surgical pathology, hematopathology, cytopathology, gastrointestinal/hepatic pathology and dermatopathology ranked as the top five most popular fellowships. Most pathology residents in their third and fourth year do not apply to pathology jobs immediately after training. Of those who did, 33 percent sought a community group practice, 24 percent sought an academic role, and another 24 percent had no preference. Starting annual salaries are between $100,000 to $250,000 for residents taking pathology jobs immediately after residency, most (37 percent) landing in the $150,000 to $200,000 range for both academic and community group practice. Forty-two percent received one offer and 39 percent received no offers....Those applying for jobs after completing one fellowship also ranked job security as a top reason for applying to and accepting positions. Interestingly, the majority of those in forensics and transfusion medicine sought additional fellowships because it fit future plans, whereas those in hematopathology cited enhancement of skills or employment opportunities as the reason for additional fellowships. This trend is reflected in the number of jobs applied to after fellowships. Thirty-seven percent of hematopathology fellows applied to more than 10 jobs. Those in forensics overwhelmingly applied to between one and three jobs.

Here's a quote from a web page about the number of postgraduate years required for pathology training (see: Training Requirements for Pathology)

Training consists of a minimum of four years of postgraduate education for anatomic and clinical pathology. There are also training programs in anatomic pathology only or clinical pathology only which require three years of postgraduate education. There are 149 pathology/anatomic and clinical residency training programs accredited by the ACGME for 2009/2010 offering over 500 categorical positions available to U.S. seniors. [Subspecialty fellowships require an additional one to two years of training.]

Here's some of the ideas that I have derived from these materials about current trends, and the future, of pathology training:

• The majority of pathology residents these days will complete one and often two fellowships.
• The job market in pathology does not seem to be too robust: forty-two percent of trainees received one job offer and 39 percent received no job offers.
• This idea about a weak market, or perhaps a weak applicant pool, is reinforced by another finding in this survey: thirty-seven percent of hematopathology fellows applied to more than ten jobs.
• It may be the case that part of the demand for fellowship positions can be accounted for by trainees without any job offers who are marking-time and hoping that the additional training will make them more competitive later.

I have a hunch that the job market in pathology will not improve soon. My prediction is based on two assumptions. The first is that many older pathologist are hanging on beyond the normal retirement age because the recent economic downturn has whittled away at their savings. Secondly, I think that digital pathology will soon make major inroads into pathology departments. If this happens, it may replicate in pathology what is happening in the radiology job market (see: Radiology Jobs Trend Downward; Blame Technology and Reimbursement). Despite the grousing about digital pathology, I believe that it will eventually enable surgical pathologists and hematopathologists to work more efficiently. This will take five or more years and require a young cohort of pathologists for whom manipulating digital images will be second nature. More mature digital technology will also contribute to this enhanced work efficiency.

Comments

[TOD'S]

thanks for your sharing