Is radiology’s workforce shortage really just a matter of “geographic inconvenience?” A new report suggests that job shortages are mostly isolated to areas that radiologists consider to be less desirable geographically, where “zombie jobs” go unfilled for months.
The workforce shortage in radiology (and healthcare for that matter) has become a common refrain, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic.
- Exam volumes are rising steadily with an aging population, but the radiology workforce remains static.
At least, that’s how the story goes. But a new study from RadBoard.io challenges that narrative, claiming that many radiologist openings are going unfilled because they are in geographically undesirable areas.
- RadBoard’s Kirill Lopatin analyzed 20.8k job postings in the U.S. over 78 days that represented 11k unique job ads (at least 47% of ads were just re-posts of the same role, but the number is probably much higher).
The study found that of the postings with complete “lifespans” (from initial posting to deactivation)…
- 25% were filled in less than one week, and another 12% in 7-14 days.
- 28% took 31-60 days to fill.
- 2.3% took 61-90 days (and maybe even longer).
So nearly one-third of radiology job ads were open longer than a month, leading RadBoard to conclude that radiology didn’t have a single fill rate for open positions – “it has two markets layered on top of each other.”
- RadBoard called radiologist job ads open for more than 60 days “zombie jobs,” with some markets having higher “stuck rates” as calculated by ads open longer than 60 days divided by total open job ads.
States with the worst job markets by stuck rate included Nebraska (68%), Minnesota (41%), and Washington state (35%).
- At the other end of the spectrum were Florida (18%), Texas (15%), and New York (14%).
This led RadBoard to conclude that the radiologist shortage was not a national problem – it was concentrated in areas where radiologists didn’t want to live.
- Also, jobs in stuck markets paid $175k less than those in faster-cycling markets ($550k vs. $725k) – the opposite of what might be expected in a scarce market.
The Takeaway
The new numbers offer an eye-opening look at the narrative around the radiologist shortage, indicating that it may be more nuanced than previously thought. And the subtext to the data hints at the divide in U.S. healthcare between rural areas and metropolitan regions.

