I keep hearing this argument. Then I look at an Insurance Explanation of Benefits statement. A Radiologist might make $1-2k/day in billings. If you are in a balance-billing state, whatever insurance doesnt pay gets forward billed to the patient. On a standard 252 day workyear, that is $250-500k/yr in billings. The average resident salary is 70k, lets assume 100k with benefits.
Of course there is plenty of overhead, but from the math i'm seeing, the average Radiology Resident is a 150-400k net revenue center. Is the overhead really greater than 150-400k/yr/resident?
What am I missing, why would a profit center need "CMS funding"? From what my doctor friends tell me, the real bottleneck is the unwillingness of AMA and ABR to open up more radiology residency spots (artificial supply constraint) with "CMS funding" a boogeyman and red herring.
A minority of funding does come from sources other than CMS. Teaching hospitals are largely free to add more residency slots if they want to. The fact that most hospitals don't do this indicates that GME programs are largely unprofitable.
I like residents, I actually started a new radiology residency program.
They are a net drain on productivity in radiology, due to the teaching obligations
Isnt that the case for almost every industry? I was a management consultant and our Partner signed off on the work before billing clients. Architects bill clients, but only when the lead architect signs off on the plans. Same for civil engineers. Same for magazines where the editor signs off on most major pieces.
The only industries that has observed the opposite effect I can think of so far are translators and stock photographers. Maybe also proof readers - but is that gen Ai or did spellcheckers already kill that branch?
This is key. Radiologists that can program (or software engineers that do medicine) make a massive difference.
When someone explains what they want and it’s built for them, you get a very different product to that built by the user.
I want more radiologists that can write software please.
I've authored and contributed to several open source projects over the years, and I'm currently doing a deep dive in CAD/CAM after buying a CNC machine.
I help my practice where I can, and have written a little utility to make generating reports easier, but I would have to quit my job if I was trying to take on the absolutely enormous task of radiology computer aides diagnosis. And I need my job!
I think about this sort of thing every so often. The difference one person can make by creating a decent piece of software might be one of the best ways of getting a return on investment (in human hours, if not in money).
When I had cancer I had to go to an Interventional Radiologist. Never heard of it before. But they use X-Ray in real-time (flouroscopy?) to guide surgery. Pretty neat.
Voice-over performers. Sketch artists. Audiobook actors. Tutors (see: https://www.google.com/finance/quote/CHGG:NYSE?window=5Y)
I dont think this is how market participants may think about it. If costs decrease, some group of radiologists will drop out of the market. We may not "need" less radiologists, but we're signaling we need less of them by not paying them as much as before.
Much like I still "need" a photographer, but short of weddings, I'm not willing to pay as much as before. I may well acquire a photogrpher for a portrait, but it would have to be priced competitively to a selfie.