Loading page content
Preparing content…
SOC 29-2036
Medical dosimetrists (O*NET 29-2036.00) generate radiation treatment plans, calculate and verify doses, communicate and oversee plan implementation, collaborate with radiation oncology teams, and perform planning-system quality assurance.
Model impact index for three equally weighted representative core tasks; not a measured share of working time or a job-loss probability. floor((75+75+75)/3+0.5)=75; fermatmind-ai-impact-v1; 2026-10-18.
Medical dosimetrists turn physicians' prescriptions into reviewable plans: designing fields from images and structures, calculating doses, verifying with applicable methods, participating in planning-system quality assurance, recording work, and communicating implementation to radiotherapy teams. Work mainly involves indoor planning. Checks, team review, and authorization awareness matter; specific tolerances, independent review methods, and signatures follow organizational procedures. Key judgments: whether input prescriptions and images are clear, structure boundaries and constraints confirmed, plan/system versions and quality-assurance states matched, calculations verified using applicable methods, and anomaly confirmation responsibilities identified. Physician approval and physics review roles are not interchangeable based on occupational titles alone.
The following judgments concern medical dosimetrists' daily work generating radiation treatment plans, calculating and verifying doses, communicating and overseeing implementation, and collaborating with radiation oncology teams; they do not predict hiring, practice qualifications, prescribing authority, or ultimate treatment responsibility.
This page covers US O*NET29-2036.00, Medical Dosimetrists: generating radiation treatment plans, calculating doses, communicating and overseeing implementation, and collaborating with radiation oncology teams. Tasks include field design, identifying and contouring structures from images, calculating course/fraction doses from prescriptions, calculation or verification, planning-system quality assurance, and brachytherapy planning. Official lists also include localization imaging and radioactivity measurements. Task classification does not equal individual practice authorization. This page centers on 29-2036.00 plan design, dose calculation/verification, and team communication. O*NET reported titles include Medical Physicist, but names confer no qualified medical physicist status. Official tasks also include supervising or performing localization imaging and radioactivity measurements, so classification cannot establish that all dosimetrists never participate in related operations. AAMD's occupational overview assigns treatment modality/dose decisions and plan review/approval to radiation oncologists, with team quality assurance before implementation. Task overlap does not confer prescribing, independent approval, or cross-role authorization. Check local and organizational scopes.
Career direction comparison
Compare core objects, delivery responsibilities, qualification requirements, and working patterns; do not interchange roles based on titles.
| Career direction | Core work and output | Key differences | Best-fit choice |
|---|---|---|---|
| Radiation Therapists | US radiation therapists deliver irradiation, position patients, and record under physicians' prescriptions and may assist dose procedures and localization. Collaboration overlaps with dosimetrists' planning work; roles are neither absolutely exclusive nor mutually recognized qualifications. | Core delivery emphasizes prescribed treatment and positioning; may assist dosimetry. Check actual roles against training and authorization. | Compare planning and implementation responsibilities. |
| Radiologic Technologists | Difference from radiologic technologists: radiologic technologists handle image acquisition and equipment operation; this occupation handles radiotherapy planning and dose verification. Compare planning and implementation responsibilities. |
AI impact on this career
Editorial trial hypothesis: tools only organize this page's fictional T1/T2/T3 documents and ordinary score tables. The author recalculates point by point and checks V3/V4, point R's +12 difference, and pending approval. Do not input real patient data, generate clinical doses, or approve automatically. Software recruitment mentions are not evidence of GenAI adoption, clinical performance, or job replacement. AI Impact Score 75% is an editorial estimate. Model impact index for three equally weighted representative core tasks; not a measured share of working time or a job-loss probability. floor((75+75+75)/3+0.5)=75; fermatmind-ai-impact-v1; 2026-10-18.The three tasks, ratings and sources are listed in the FermatMind method source record on this page.
FermatMind AI Impact Score estimation method v1
FermatMind / 费马测试 · 2026-10-18
Editorial ratings use the existing occupational responsibilities and AI task analysis on this page. They are not adoption rates, measured effects, job-disappearance or personal-unemployment probabilities, or official scores from Stanford or another external institution. No measured time weights or future robot deployment are assumed.
Chinese mainland salary reference
Scope note: public wage data aggregate industries or broad personnel categories. Health industry averages cannot replace this occupation's wages; no proxy figures are used before an exact mapping is established.
Category boundary: zh-CN is only the page language, not proof of an exact equivalent occupation in mainland China. Do not extrapolate starting pay, medians, or personal income across jurisdictions using industry averages or US wages.
Data for this occupation not obtained
Data for this occupation not obtained
Data for this occupation not obtained
U.S. salary reference
BLS 2025 wage data: median annual wage USD 147,470 (approximately USD 70.90 per hour); 10th percentile USD 111,670 (USD 53.69 per hour), 25th percentile USD 132,080 (USD 63.50 per hour), 75th percentile USD 167,030 (USD 80.31 per hour), and 90th percentile USD 185,450 (USD 89.16 per hour). These concern this occupation. Percentiles are statistical positions and do not describe individual take-home income. Wage distribution positions: these figures describe a US statistical distribution. Percentiles do not represent seniority or experience levels and cannot be interpreted as entry-level pay or guaranteed income. The current complete national wage table was obtained and five annual/hourly levels verified; the 25th/75th-percentile reading gap is resolved. Current O*NET industry shares are 89% health care and social assistance and 11% other industries including education, not industry wages. This occupation's 2025—2035 figures are 3500 to 3700, growth 5%, net increase 200, and annual average openings 200. Counts are rounded independently; do not recalculate official percentages. 2025 occupational industry median annual wages: outpatient care centers USD 174400, physicians' offices USD 148190, hospitals USD 147010. National percentiles do not replace industry wages; gaps for other industries remain. Separate wage influences from entry conditions: regions, organizations, and duties may affect income. National percentiles are not fixed seniority tiers or promises. Check US accredited dosimetry program/CMD conditions separately from actual Chinese appointments.
| Percentile |
|---|
Fit Signals
First observe whether you distinguish totals, individual points, versions, and approvals in the paper problem and retain correction evidence. Ordinary arithmetic/document problems do not establish clinical planning ability, qualifications, or competence.
Positive Signals： Positive signals: willingness to repeatedly verify doses and boundaries, follow quality-assurance standards, and communicate clearly with radiotherapy teams.
Reasons for Caution： Reasons for caution: if high accuracy and pressured delivery are difficult or prolonged indoor planning is uncomfortable, consider adjacent directions or clinical roles first.
Trial Actions： Complete the T1/T2/T3 problem with separate version/point/approval columns, preserving T2 and T3 original values and confirmation recipients. Do not calculate patient doses or contour images.
Risks and Boundaries
Handle risks in terms of triggers, consequences, controls, and escalation boundaries; editorial synthesis does not replace dose-verification standards or medical standards.
O*NET supports task and context background. Risk consequences/controls are editorial analysis, not accident rates. Independent verification, calibration, and approval responsibilities follow organizational standards; complete guidelines or specific Chinese legal provisions were not established. Original AAPM abstract-only entries are not complete clinical standards.
Typical scenario：Dose calculation or transfer errors.
Roles most affected：Planning and dosimetry roles
Possible consequence：May affect treatment safety and effectiveness.
Entry Paths
US O*NET Job Zone 4 describes occupational-group preparation, typically a four-year bachelor's degree with exceptions; experience descriptions are not uniform occupational durations. BLS: this occupation typically requires a bachelor's degree and completion of an accredited medical dosimetry program. Employers usually require/prefer CMD, and programs include supervised clinical experience. MDCB's exam eligibility overview requires at least a bachelor's degree in any discipline and graduation from a JRCERT-accredited medical dosimetry program lasting at least 12 months. This page does not claim to have read the full application handbook. Check Chinese appointments, training, and authorization separately; US conditions do not establish Chinese recognition. Editorial portfolio only: original T1/T2/T3 problem, three-condition table, total differences, T2 version / T3 value and approval requests, and corrections. Radiotherapy or physics experience may transfer, but does not automatically confer CMD exam eligibility or clinical authorization. In interviews, use paper records to explain arithmetic versus approval. Demonstrate real clinical ability only with compliant supervised-training evidence; do not independently contour images or calculate patient doses. Seven-day exploration, 30—60 minutes daily: Day 1, distinguish planning/irradiation/physics duties. Day 2, separate three exercise conditions. Day 3, hide answers and calculate T1/T2/T3. Day 4, write T2's version request and T3's two requests. Day 5, retain corrections. Day 6, have a peer challenge totals and versions using only the problem statement. Day 7, compile two answer versions, feedback, and reasons to continue or change direction. No real patients, images, or radiation equipment. Peers cannot approve clinical plans. This round found no O*NET certification entries, which does not prove CMD certification is absent; MDCB's eligibility overview was checked. The training directory has 267 entries, led by mixed program/award statistics for Medical Radiologic Technology/Science—Radiation Therapist. These are not all accredited dosimetry programs, current enrollment, exam eligibility, or hiring rates.
Market Signals
Employment levels, growth rates, net changes, and annual openings must be explained separately and cannot be combined into an individual employment guarantee.
US nationwide · Display scope: Medical Dosimetrists (O*NET 29-2036.00)
Occupational employment: 3,500 in 2025 to projected 3,700 in 2035, growth 5%, net increase 200, annual average openings 200 (2025—2035). Published counts are rounded independently; do not recalculate official percentages from rounded differences. Openings include growth and replacement, not current vacancies or hiring rates.
Employment Level and Change
Employment level, change, and openings must be explained separately.
Occupational statistical projections, not a hiring guarantee. Do not recalculate official percentages from rounded counts.
Different US O*NET response options: 100% face time pressure daily, 85% consider accuracy extremely important, 80% use email daily, 85% have face-to-face discussions daily, 80% use telephones daily, 85% work in controlled indoor environments daily, and 79% sit continually or almost continually. 65% consider consequences of error extremely serious, and 79% report typical 40-hour weeks. Percentages are not accident probabilities, uniform overtime systems, or Chinese job surveys. BLS describes mostly full-time work with usually regular schedules because treatments are often planned in advance; check specific organizational duty schedules separately.
Choose a real task from this page for a small practice project or a conversation with someone in the field. Use the planning guides to set a date, an output and feedback questions before deciding whether to continue.
Positive signals: distinguish matching totals, matching individual points, matching versions, and approval states, preserve T2/T3 original values, and hand over accurately.
Paper ordinary-score and document-state problems only: no patient dose calculations, image contouring, treatment planning, or radiation equipment operation. Not proof of clinical competence or qualifications.
60-minute paper version and arithmetic checking problem (editorially fictional, not a treatment plan): reference document V4 requires ordinary scores of 100 / 200 / 300 at three record points P/Q/R. Summary table T1 states V4, scores 100 / 200 / 300, transfer approved yes; T2 states V3, 100 / 200 / 300, approved yes; T3 states V4, 100 / 200 / 312, approval pending. Exercise rules require all three conditions for paper transfer readiness: character-for-character version match, exact equality of every score, and approval yes. Calculate each table's total and difference from the reference, list three conditions and confirmation recipients, and preserve original values. Scores have no physical units; there are no patients, prescriptions, images, targets, or dose tolerances. These are not clinical verification standards. Reference solution: reference total 600. T1 totals 600, difference 0, meeting version/score/approval conditions and paper transfer readiness. T2 totals 600, difference 0, but V3≠V4; arithmetic agreement cannot resolve a version mismatch. T3 totals 612, difference +12; point R has 312≠300 and approval is pending. Record both issues separately without changing values or adding approval. Only T1 currently meets exercise conditions; this does not mean any treatment plan is approved. Spend 10 minutes reading, 20 minutes tabulating and calculating, 20 minutes writing T2's version request and T3's value/approval requests, and 10 minutes hiding answers, redoing, and retaining corrections. No clinical systems, radiation sources, or real images.
Verify first: prescriptions and target constraints, image quality and contour boundaries, planning-system status and versions, dose verification methods and tolerances, quality-assurance status, and plan approval and deviation handling requiring authorized confirmation.
The work cycle comprises input checks, prescription-based planning, calculation verification, quality-assurance records, team review/approval, and implementation communication. Specific review methods, tolerances, and signatures follow organizational procedures. This page's exercise rules are not clinical thresholds. Refer unresolved version, calculation, or quality-assurance issues to authorized personnel under organizational procedures; the webpage does not decide to pause all treatment.
| Dimension | Primary track | Comparison track |
|---|---|---|
| Work Cycle | Contour, plan, verify, and deliver | |
| Step One | Check prescriptions and images | |
| Step Two | Contour and confirm anatomical structures | |
| Step Three | Design fields and dose proposals | |
| Step Four |
Inputs: prescriptions and target constraints, images and anatomical structures, treatment planning systems, beam-modification and immobilization devices, and dose and quality-assurance records.
Verifiable outputs: treatment plans and dose calculations, field and dose-distribution documents, dose verification and quality-assurance records, immobilization and beam-modification device requirements, and dose and implementation records.
Complete workflow: check prescriptions and images → contour and confirm structures → design fields and dose proposals → calculate and verify using applicable methods → quality-assurance records and team review/approval → communicate and oversee implementation. Specific review responsibilities follow organizational procedures.
US O*NET Job Zone 4 describes occupational-group preparation, typically a four-year bachelor's degree with exceptions; experience descriptions are not uniform occupational durations. BLS: this occupation typically requires a bachelor's degree and completion of an accredited medical dosimetry program. Employers usually require/prefer CMD, and programs include supervised clinical experience. MDCB's exam eligibility overview requires at least a bachelor's degree in any discipline and graduation from a JRCERT-accredited medical dosimetry program lasting at least 12 months. This page does not claim to have read the full application handbook. Check Chinese appointments, training, and authorization separately; US conditions do not establish Chinese recognition. This page centers on 29-2036.00 plan design, dose calculation/verification, and team communication. O*NET reported titles include Medical Physicist, but names confer no qualified medical physicist status. Official tasks also include supervising or performing localization imaging and radioactivity measurements, so classification cannot establish that all dosimetrists never participate in related operations. AAMD's occupational overview assigns treatment modality/dose decisions and plan review/approval to radiation oncologists, with team quality assurance before implementation. Task overlap does not confer prescribing, independent approval, or cross-role authorization. Check local and organizational scopes.
Medical Dosimetrists' Objects of Work and AI Boundaries Editorial trial hypothesis: tools only organize this page's fictional T1/T2/T3 documents and ordinary score tables. The author recalculates point by point and checks V3/V4, point R's +12 difference, and pending approval. Do not input real patient data, generate clinical doses, or approve automatically. Software recruitment mentions are not evidence of GenAI adoption, clinical performance, or job replacement.
| Handle image acquisition and equipment operation; this occupation handles radiotherapy planning and dose verification. |
| Compare imaging and planning. |
| Nuclear Medicine Technologists | Difference from nuclear medicine technologists: nuclear medicine technologists focus on nuclear imaging and radiopharmaceuticals; this occupation focuses on external-beam and brachytherapy planning and doses. | Focus on nuclear imaging and radiopharmaceuticals; this occupation focuses on external-beam and brachytherapy planning and doses. | Compare diagnostic and treatment modalities. |
|---|
| Diagnostic Medical Sonographers | Difference from diagnostic medical sonographers: sonographers focus on ultrasound imaging; this occupation focuses on radiation doses and treatment plans, with different objects and outputs. | Focus on ultrasound imaging; this occupation focuses on radiation doses and treatment plans. | Compare imaging and dose objects. |
|---|
Adjacent occupations require separate evidence of tools, qualifications, and responsibilities.
Next, test the direction through observable deliverables.
Editorial trial hypothesis: tools only organize this page's fictional T1/T2/T3 documents and ordinary score tables. The author recalculates point by point and checks V3/V4, point R's +12 difference, and pending approval. Do not input real patient data, generate clinical doses, or approve automatically. Software recruitment mentions are not evidence of GenAI adoption, clinical performance, or job replacement.
No GenAI performance, organizational adoption, or employment outcomes were obtained for this occupation. Eclipse IDE17% and Epic6% are recruitment mentions under original names, not confirmation of a specific TPS product or automated clinical functions. Fictional problems are editorial self-checks only.
Task exposure does not equal adoption rates, unemployment probability, or replacement dates.
| Work area | Task | Current change | Human control point |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plan Design | Design fields and dose proposals | Assisted organization of fictional records is only a hypothesis. Recruitment software names do not establish validated automatic contouring or clinical calculations. | Check prescriptions, targets, and organ-at-risk constraints. |
| Dose Calculation and Verification | Calculate and verify prescribed doses | Editorial hypothesis: organize fictional version/score tables only, without validating automated clinical execution. | Humans check T2's version and T3's scores and approval, preserving differences. Correct paper work cannot replace clinical verification. |
| Images and Contouring | Contour and label anatomical structures | Editorial hypothesis: organize fictional version/score tables only, without validating automated clinical execution. | Authorized personnel review contours and boundaries. |
| Quality Assurance | Perform planning-system quality assurance | Editorial hypothesis: organize fictional version/score tables only, without validating automated clinical execution. | The responsible person confirms release and corrections. |
Check official tasks, software recruitment demand, tool performance, organizational adoption, and employment outcomes separately. Paper organization is an editorial hypothesis only.
Differences across directions: AI-related changes and remaining responsibilities differ across plan design, dose verification, image contouring, and quality assurance.
AI primarily changesEditorial hypothesis: fictional document organization
Human responsibility remainsPlan approval and constraint judgments
AI primarily changesEditorial hypothesis: fictional document organization
Human responsibility remainsVerification conclusions and release
Responsibility process: from checking inputs and limiting tasks to human review, documentation, and escalation.
Confirm prescriptions, images, and anatomical structures.
Assist only within validated planning systems and procedures.
Authorized personnel review plans, doses, and boundaries.
Record deviations and anomalies immediately and escalate through the prescribed process.
May affect treatment safety and effectiveness.
Control: Review under independent verification and quality-assurance procedures.
May cause irradiation-area deviations.
Control: Contour using images and team review.
May change medical and legal responsibilities.
Control: Refer to authorized personnel for confirmation through the authorization chain.
Complete the T1/T2/T3 paper version/score problem, without clinical plans or contouring.
Retain plan, verification, and quality-assurance records.
Define verification, responsibility, and escalation boundaries first.
US 2025 recruitment software mentions cannot establish widespread GenAI adoption or layoff timelines.
Source: O*NET 29-2036.00 Hot TechnologiesOriginal source ↗
Authorized people remain responsible for plan approval, dose verification, and clinical responsibility.
Source: O*NET 29-2036.00 Detailed Profile (Tasks, Skills, and Context)Original source ↗
Distinguish three kinds of evidence: task capability, organizational adoption, and employment outcomes.
Source: O*NET 29-2036.00 Summary (Occupational Identity and Description)Original source ↗
First complete the fictional version/score/approval checks. Actual clinical tools separately require checks of purpose, performance, versions, privacy, and organizational authorization.
No national occupational wage was obtained for this occupation. This item is not starting pay, take-home income, or a personal quote.
| Role Scope | Reference Value | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Actual Chinese Roles | Planning/Dosimetry Duties | Check location, organizational appointment, and authorization individually; no US recognition is implied. |
| US Occupational-Group Preparation | JobZone4 | Typically a bachelor's degree with exceptions; group experience descriptions are not uniform occupational durations. |
| US Occupational Programs | Accredited Dosimetry Programs | BLS describes accredited programs and supervised clinical experience; adjacent radiotherapy experience does not replace the program. |
| CMD Exam Eligibility | MDCB Overview | At least a bachelor's degree and graduation from at least a 12-month JRCERT-accredited dosimetry program. Certification does not equal prescribing/independent approval authority. |
Editorial exploration setting, not Chinese industry shares, demand rates, or salaries.
Editorial exploration setting, not Chinese industry shares, demand rates, or salaries.
Editorial exploration setting, not Chinese industry shares, demand rates, or salaries.
Insufficient evidence: no mainland China national occupational wages or safely matching occupation were obtained. Industry averages and US wages are not substituted.
| Annual Reference |
|---|
| Hourly Wage Reference |
|---|
| Explanation |
|---|
| Lower Percentile | USD 111,670 per year | Approximately USD 53.69 per hour | The 10th-percentile statistical position. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Median | USD 147,470 per year | Approximately USD 70.90 per hour | The median in 2025 wage data. |
| Upper Percentile | USD 185,450 per year | Approximately USD 89.16 per hour | The 90th-percentile statistical position. |
Wages · 10th Percentile：USD 111,670 per year；O*NET 29-2036.00 National Wages (BLS 2025 Wage Data)
Wages · 25th Percentile：USD 132,080 per year；O*NET 29-2036.00 National Wages (BLS 2025 Wage Data)
Wages · Median：USD 147,470 per year；O*NET 29-2036.00 National Wages (BLS 2025 Wage Data)
Wages · 75th Percentile：USD 167,030 per year；O*NET 29-2036.00 National Wages (BLS 2025 Wage Data)
Wages · 90th Percentile：USD 185,450 per year；O*NET 29-2036.00 National Wages (BLS 2025 Wage Data)
No. Percentiles are statistical positions.
It covers Medical Dosimetrists (29-2036.00).
2025 national wages; 2025—2035 employment projections.
They cannot be directly combined.
| Industry | Industry Median Annual Wages | How to interpret |
|---|---|---|
| Outpatient Care Centers | USD 174,400 per year | BLS May 2025 industry median annual wage for this occupation, not a national percentile or employment share. |
| Offices of Physicians | USD 148,190 per year | BLS May 2025 industry median annual wage for this occupation, not a national percentile or employment share. |
| Hospitals (All Ownership Types) | USD 147,010 per year | BLS May 2025 industry median annual wage for this occupation, not a national percentile or employment share. |
| Other Industries | Occupational industry value not obtained | The BLS occupational table lists only three detailed industries; a fourth was not obtained. Current O*NET89/11 provides employment shares, not substitute wages. |
US O*NET Job Zone 4 describes occupational-group preparation, typically a four-year bachelor's degree with exceptions; experience descriptions are not uniform occupational durations. BLS: this occupation typically requires a bachelor's degree and completion of an accredited medical dosimetry program. Employers usually require/prefer CMD, and programs include supervised clinical experience. MDCB's exam eligibility overview requires at least a bachelor's degree in any discipline and graduation from a JRCERT-accredited medical dosimetry program lasting at least 12 months. This page does not claim to have read the full application handbook. Check Chinese appointments, training, and authorization separately; US conditions do not establish Chinese recognition.
BLS lists related experience for this occupation as None; some entrants previously work as radiation therapists. JobZone group experience cannot become a uniform hard threshold.
Organizational and regional differences are substantial; do not extrapolate across regions.
O*NET occupational interest baseline
ICR describes activity preferences only and cannot determine qualifications.First observe interest, stress, and collaboration experiences in real tasks.
Activity preferences only help design trials; they cannot establish qualifications or performance.
What Observable Behaviors Correspond to the ICR Interest Code?
RIASEC (ICR): the interest code describes preferences for analytical reasoning (Investigative), procedural data handling (Conventional), and operating equipment and physical objects (Realistic). Use it only to generate hypotheses, not infer hiring or competence.
Do not use it this way: Hiring, qualifications, or performance cannot be inferred from this.
Go to the career interest trial and design observationsWhich Tasks Demonstrate Attention to Accuracy and Verification?
The Big Five supports reflection only: under delivery pressure, can you preserve T2's version difference and T3's two unresolved issues? Personality scores do not replace clinical training.
Do not use it this way: Hiring, qualifications, or performance cannot be inferred from this.
Go to the career interest trial and design observationsCan Personality Labels Determine Fit for Dosimetry Roles?
Labels such as MBTI cannot determine competence. First check actual tasks, standards, and responsibility boundaries, then decide whether to continue.
Do not use it this way: Hiring, qualifications, or performance cannot be inferred from this.
Go to the career interest trial and design observationsWould You Add Approval for T3?
Truthfully preserve the pending state and confirmation recipient; do not infer relationships between Enneagram types and clinical performance.
Do not use it this way: Hiring, qualifications, or performance cannot be inferred from this.
Go to the career interest trial and design observationsDoes a Total of 600 Always Meet the Exercise Conditions?
T2 still has a version mismatch. Recheck three conditions; this is not an IQ norm or dosimetry ability test.
Do not use it this way: Hiring, qualifications, or performance cannot be inferred from this.
Go to the career interest trial and design observationsHow Do You Explain When a Peer Presses to Transfer T2?
Point out the V3/V4 difference and refer to the confirmer, preserving original records. One response cannot establish an EQ score.
Do not use it this way: Hiring, qualifications, or performance cannot be inferred from this.
Go to the career interest trial and design observationsFits better when: Can design fields and dose proposals according to prescriptions and anatomical constraints.
Watch for: Plans require review and approval.
Fits better when: Can independently verify and record dose calculations.
Watch for: Verification conclusions must be reviewable.
Fits better when: Can contour and confirm anatomical structures from images.
Watch for: Contours require team review.
Fits better when: Can perform planning-system quality assurance and calibration.
Watch for: Release requires authorized confirmation.
Fits better when: Can develop brachytherapy plans and calculate doses.
Watch for: Execution must follow procedures and authorization.
Fits better when: Can collaborate with radiation oncology teams and mentor.
Watch for: Clinical conclusions must remain within authority.
Check through the work-sample experience on this page.
Check with a fictional planning task.
Check against communication and review processes.
Refer relevant unresolved activities under organizational procedures; the webpage does not require pausing all treatment.
Check against format and traceability requirements.
Confirm under authorization and team-review rules.
Confirmed by medical physics and the authorization chain.
Complete the T1/T2/T3 ordinary-score/version problem and corrections, not a fictional patient treatment plan.
How to reduce risk：Review under independent verification and quality-assurance procedures.
Evidence：O*NET 29-2036.00 Summary (Occupational Identity and Description) · O*NET 29-2036.00 Medical Dosimetrists
Typical scenario：Contour or target deviations.
Roles most affected：Imaging and contouring roles
Possible consequence：May cause irradiation-area deviations.
How to reduce risk：Contour using images and team review.
Evidence：O*NET 29-2036.00 Summary (Occupational Identity and Description) · O*NET 29-2036.00 Medical Dosimetrists
Typical scenario：Missing planning-system quality assurance.
Roles most affected：Quality-assurance roles
Possible consequence：May cause systematic errors.
How to reduce risk：Perform calibration and documentation under procedures.
Evidence：O*NET 29-2036.00 Summary (Occupational Identity and Description) · O*NET 29-2036.00 Medical Dosimetrists
Typical scenario：Skipping verification steps under time pressure.
Roles most affected：Plan delivery roles
Possible consequence：May amplify errors.
How to reduce risk：Retain verification evidence and escalate through procedures.
Evidence：O*NET 29-2036.00 Summary (Occupational Identity and Description) · O*NET 29-2036.00 Medical Dosimetrists
Typical scenario：Unresolved prescription, contour, dose, or system-state questions, or requests for unauthorized approval.
Roles most affected：Planning, verification, quality-assurance, and delivery roles
Possible consequence：May change medical and legal responsibilities.
How to reduce risk：Isolate relevant unresolved activities, record facts/impacts/questions, and refer to authorized personnel under organizational procedures. The webpage does not decide to pause all treatment.
Evidence：O*NET 29-2036.00 Summary (Occupational Identity and Description) · O*NET 29-2036.00 Medical Dosimetrists
Typical scenario：Conflating this occupation with radiation therapists, radiologic technologists, or nuclear medicine technologists.
Roles most affected：Radiotherapy and technical roles
Possible consequence：May misalign authorization and responsibilities.
How to reduce risk：Distinguish adjacent roles using the scope of O*NET 29-2036.00.
Evidence：O*NET 29-2036.00 Summary (Occupational Identity and Description) · O*NET 29-2036.00 Medical Dosimetrists
Typical scope：Complete the T1/T2/T3 three-condition paper checks.
Readiness evidence：Record total differences, point differences, version differences, and pending approval separately.
Credential boundary：Editorial progression illustration. Real duties depend on accredited training, supervision, and organizational authorization; no guaranteed duration or promotion.
Next moves：Capability ladder: before entering medical dosimetry, verify the official occupational scope, actual employer requirements, education or training, local practice and supervision rules, and supervised tasks. Do not infer these directly from adjacent occupations. Advancement rests on reviewable planning and verification records, not a guaranteed number of years.
Typical scope：Independently complete routine treatment plans and dose calculations.
Readiness evidence：Provide plan and verification records.
Credential boundary：Editorial progression illustration. Real duties depend on accredited training, supervision, and organizational authorization; no guaranteed duration or promotion.
Next moves：Transition path: before changing direction, list transferable skills in plan design, dose verification, quality assurance, and teamwork, alongside physics, standards, and practice knowledge to acquire. Check each against adjacent roles' qualifications and responsibilities.
Typical scope：Take responsibility for planning and dosimetry for complex cases or specialized techniques.
Readiness evidence：Provide complex plan and verification records.
Credential boundary：Editorial progression illustration. Real duties depend on accredited training, supervision, and organizational authorization; no guaranteed duration or promotion.
Next moves：Expand into method improvement.
Typical scope：Mentor and review plans within authorized scope.
Readiness evidence：Provide mentoring and review records.
Credential boundary：Editorial progression illustration. Real duties depend on accredited training, supervision, and organizational authorization; no guaranteed duration or promotion.
Next moves：Expand authorization according to organization and rules.
Typical scope：Learn dose verification, calibration, and documentation processes.
Readiness evidence：Retain quality-assurance practice records.
Credential boundary：Editorial progression illustration. Real duties depend on accredited training, supervision, and organizational authorization; no guaranteed duration or promotion.
Next moves：Expand into independent quality assurance.
Typical scope：Independently perform planning-system quality assurance and verification.
Readiness evidence：Provide quality-assurance and correction records.
Credential boundary：Editorial progression illustration. Real duties depend on accredited training, supervision, and organizational authorization; no guaranteed duration or promotion.
Next moves：Expand into system assessment.
Typical scope：Participate in quality-system and process reviews.
Readiness evidence：Provide review and remediation records.
Credential boundary：Editorial progression illustration. Real duties depend on accredited training, supervision, and organizational authorization; no guaranteed duration or promotion.
Typical scope：Learn team communication, documentation, and handover requirements.
Readiness evidence：Retain communication and documentation practice.
Credential boundary：Editorial progression illustration. Real duties depend on accredited training, supervision, and organizational authorization; no guaranteed duration or promotion.
Next moves：Expand into independent communication.
Typical scope：Explain plans and dose rationales to radiotherapy teams.
Readiness evidence：Provide communication and review records.
Credential boundary：Editorial progression illustration. Real duties depend on accredited training, supervision, and organizational authorization; no guaranteed duration or promotion.
Next moves：Expand into complex case coordination.
Typical scope：Take responsibility for mentoring dosimetrists or students.
Readiness evidence：Provide mentoring and assessment records.
Credential boundary：Editorial progression illustration. Real duties depend on accredited training, supervision, and organizational authorization; no guaranteed duration or promotion.
Confirm prescriptions, images, and anatomical structures.
Complete plan design and dose verification under procedures.
Produce reviewable plan and verification records.
Expand review, mentoring, and standards duties within authorized scope.
US nationwide · Display scope: 29-2036.00
200 openings per year (2025—2035)
Openings (Annual Average)
Ten-year annual average includes growth and replacement, not current vacancies or net growth.
Does not establish：Cannot be treated as an individual's hiring probability.
US nationwide · Display scope: 29-2036.00
USD 147,470 per year
Median Annual Wage
Median from BLS 2025 wage data, not starting pay or take-home income.
Does not establish：Percentiles are statistical positions.
These are capability relationships, not automatic promotions or credential waivers.
Transfers：Radiotherapy team communication, prescription records, and some equipment/localization knowledge may transfer toward radiation therapy work. Planning experience does not establish safe irradiation delivery ability.
Build next：Develop supervised training and local qualifications for patient positioning, prescribed irradiation delivery, equipment operation, protection, and reaction observation in the target role, rather than adding dosimetrist planning abilities again.
View career profileTransfers：Anatomical/image recognition and recording knowledge may transfer, without implying existing image acquisition ability.
Build next：Develop compliant training and qualifications for target diagnostic image acquisition, positioning, equipment operation, and image quality.
View career profileTransfers：Radiation protection and recording habits may transfer, without assuming existing radiopharmaceutical imaging experience.
Build next：Develop target training and qualifications in radioisotope/radiopharmaceutical preparation and administration, imaging measurement, and related protection.
View career profileTransfers：Anatomy and team communication may transfer, without implying existing ultrasound scanning ability.
Build next：Develop target training/qualifications in ultrasound scanning, documentation, and image quality, rather than radiation dose planning.
View career profileTransfers：Dosimetry/quality-assurance and team communication knowledge may transfer; job titles do not equal QMP status.
Build next：AAPM's current PS7-A QMP requirements include a relevant master's or doctorate, corresponding subfield certification, and continuing education. Develop target scientific clinical training and authority; a dosimetrist title is not QMP status.
Career profile unavailableTransfers：Research-question, documentation, and data-analysis habits may transfer, not existing independent research evidence.
Build next：Develop human disease/health research design, investigation or R&D, analysis, reviewable research outputs, and ethical conditions, rather than clinical dose verification.
View career profileThis page centers on 29-2036.00 plan design, dose calculation/verification, and team communication. O*NET reported titles include Medical Physicist, but names confer no qualified medical physicist status. Official tasks also include supervising or performing localization imaging and radioactivity measurements, so classification cannot establish that all dosimetrists never participate in related operations. AAMD's occupational overview assigns treatment modality/dose decisions and plan review/approval to radiation oncologists, with team quality assurance before implementation. Task overlap does not confer prescribing, independent approval, or cross-role authorization. Check local and organizational scopes.
Observe version, point-by-point, and approval judgments on paper. ICR is an interest code and confers no clinical ability or qualifications.
Editorial trial hypothesis: tools only organize this page's fictional T1/T2/T3 documents and ordinary score tables. The author recalculates point by point and checks V3/V4, point R's +12 difference, and pending approval. Do not input real patient data, generate clinical doses, or approve automatically. Software recruitment mentions are not evidence of GenAI adoption, clinical performance, or job replacement.
This page centers on 29-2036.00 plan design, dose calculation/verification, and team communication. O*NET reported titles include Medical Physicist, but names confer no qualified medical physicist status. Official tasks also include supervising or performing localization imaging and radioactivity measurements, so classification cannot establish that all dosimetrists never participate in related operations. AAMD's occupational overview assigns treatment modality/dose decisions and plan review/approval to radiation oncologists, with team quality assurance before implementation. Task overlap does not confer prescribing, independent approval, or cross-role authorization. Check local and organizational scopes.
This page has not obtained a mainland China national occupational wage distribution precisely corresponding to O*NET29-2036.00. National Bureau of Statistics 2025 urban-unit wage tables aggregate industries/broad personnel categories and do not support treating health industry averages as medical dosimetrists' median. No claim is made that China has no wage information for this occupation.
US 2025 national median USD 147470 per year (70.90 per hour), with 10 / 25 / 75 / 90 percentiles of 111670 / 132080 / 167030 / 185450. Current BLS separately confirms 10 / median / 90; 25 / 75 retain the previously verified national table because the complete page was not obtained this time. Keep three industry medians separate from national percentiles; they do not establish starting pay or individual take-home income.
US O*NET Job Zone 4 describes occupational-group preparation, typically a four-year bachelor's degree with exceptions; experience descriptions are not uniform occupational durations. BLS: this occupation typically requires a bachelor's degree and completion of an accredited medical dosimetry program. Employers usually require/prefer CMD, and programs include supervised clinical experience. MDCB's exam eligibility overview requires at least a bachelor's degree in any discipline and graduation from a JRCERT-accredited medical dosimetry program lasting at least 12 months. This page does not claim to have read the full application handbook. Check Chinese appointments, training, and authorization separately; US conditions do not establish Chinese recognition.
The main risks are dose calculation or transfer errors, contour or target deviations, missing system quality assurance, skipping verification under time pressure, and unauthorized approval. Responses include independent verification, image-based and team-reviewed contouring, procedural quality assurance, retained verification evidence, and authorization-chain confirmation.
O*NET2024—2034 occupational figures: 4800→4900, official growth 4%, annual average openings 200. BLS2025—2035: 3500→3700, net increase 200, official growth 5%, annual average openings 200. Published counts are rounded; do not replace official growth rates with ratios of rounded differences. Keep period baselines separate; do not combine year-over-year comparisons or guess why counts changed. Openings include replacements, not current vacancies/hiring probabilities.
Complete the T1/T2/T3 three-condition paper checks and preserve differences/corrections, then assess whether to pursue accredited training. This is neither clinical practice nor competence certification.
Evidence for China, the US, and specific institutions is presented separately: wage, employment, qualification, medical, and AI conclusions must not be combined across scopes. This page's US statistics concern occupation 29-2036.00. Medical dosimetry involves dose verification, quality assurance, and practice boundaries. This page provides occupational decision-making and research exercise information; it does not replace local law, medical standards, dosimetry standards, or other professional advice. Any statement of insufficient evidence means only that a bounded search did not establish safely matching data; proxies or memory are not used to fabricate figures.
FermatMind research workflow
O*NET2026 summary; accessed 2026-10-03
O*NET 29-2036.00 Medical Dosimetrists
Limitations：Professional organization scope; does not replace local regulations.
Limitations：Professional guideline scope; does not replace local regulations.
Limitations：Professional guideline scope; does not replace local regulations.
Limitations：An editorial scale is not evidence of adoption rates, layoffs, regulations, or licenses and credentials.
Limitations：Certification does not equal licensure, approval authority, or ultimate responsibility.
Limitations：Industry or broad personnel-category averages are not occupational medians.
Limitations：US occupational definition, not Chinese professional titles, practice licenses, or employer appointments.
Limitations：Industry percentages do not equal hiring probabilities.
Limitations：Includes replacement demand; not an individual's hiring probability.
Limitations：Supports data freshness explanations only.
Limitations：Percentiles do not describe individual take-home income.
Limitations：US work context does not replace Chinese law or employer requirements.
Limitations：US occupational scope; no mapping to mainland China is presumed.
Limitations：A tool's appearance does not establish adoption rates, unemployment probability, or replacement dates.
Limitations：Industry distribution signals employer settings, not demand forecasts.
Limitations：Certification does not equal licensure, approval authority, or ultimate responsibility.
Limitations：Preparation level is not a uniform hiring threshold.
Limitations：O*NET OnLine presents BLS OEWS wage data; preserve the displayed period, worker population, geography and unit. A direct BLS access failure does not invalidate this opened O*NET page.
Limitations：Task and context samples vary by organization and technology stack.
Limitations：Task and context samples vary by organization and technology stack.
Limitations：Task and context samples vary by organization and technology stack.
Limitations：Task and context samples vary by organization and technology stack.
Limitations：Task and context samples vary by organization and technology stack.
Limitations：Task and context samples vary by organization and technology stack.
Limitations：Task and context samples vary by organization and technology stack.
Limitations：Task and context samples vary by organization and technology stack.
Limitations：Editorial ratings use the existing occupational responsibilities and AI task analysis on this page. They are not adoption rates, measured effects, job-disappearance or personal-unemployment probabilities, or official scores from Stanford or another external institution. No measured time weights or future robot deployment are assumed.
The 19 tasks/ICR/nine context groups, 40 / 35 / 15 education responses for new entrants, and 2025 national five-level annual/hourly wages are currently verified. The complete wage-reading gap is resolved without updating shared same-source records; older shared failed-reading records remain. Three BLS detailed-industry wages were verified and retained; industry shares updated to 89 / 11. Employment consistently uses 2025—2035: 3500 to 3700 / 5% / net increase 200 / annual average 200, without recalculating rounded percentages. Recruitment Eclipse IDE17/Epic6/MEDITECH retains original names and unavailable data, not GenAI/TPS product confirmation. MDCB current eligibility overview verified. No certification-directory entries does not mean no CMD; 267 training entries mix radiation therapy courses and are not all accredited dosimetry programs. AAPM PS7-A is currently effective; QMP names confer no qualifications. Rereading AAMD's overview timed out; older shared content retains historical registration. AAPM11.a/TG275 full texts were not reread; specific Chinese regulations and GenAI outcome gaps remain. Original T1/T2/T3 problem retained.
| Calculate and verify doses |
| Step Five | Quality assurance and records |
|---|
| Step Six | Communicate and oversee implementation |
|---|
Next moves：Expand into external audit preparation.
Typical scope：Improve quality assurance and processes within authorized scope.
Readiness evidence：Provide comparative records before and after improvement.
Credential boundary：Editorial progression illustration. Real duties depend on accredited training, supervision, and organizational authorization; no guaranteed duration or promotion.
Next moves：Expand authorization according to organization and rules.
Next moves：Expand into team quality responsibilities.
Typical scope：Support standards and training responsibilities within authorized scope.
Readiness evidence：Provide standards and training records.
Credential boundary：Editorial progression illustration. Real duties depend on accredited training, supervision, and organizational authorization; no guaranteed duration or promotion.
Next moves：Obtain authorization according to organization and rules.
