RESUMO
Forensic psychiatry fellowship programs recruit applicants through a nonstandardized process that differs by program. Although there are deadlines, informal guidance, and more recent communication guidelines, perceived differences in recruitment practices persist between geographic regions, small and large programs, and newer and more well-established programs. In the wake of a survey of fellowship applicants that found mixed opinions surrounding the application process, U.S. forensic fellowship directors undertook a mixed method quantitative-qualitative survey of their colleagues to assess interest in a match as a potential improvement and factors influencing that interest (e.g., program size, age, and unfilled positions). With responses from all 46 active U.S. programs, results indicated broad support for principles of fairness, transparency, and minimizing pressure on applicants, with an almost perfectly divided interest in a match. Respondents supported the use of a centralized database to standardize the application process and favored certain exceptions for internal applicants. Hypotheses about the reasons underlying program directors' attitudes toward a match did not yield significant results, with only the size of a program approaching significance. This novel comprehensive survey of forensic fellowship directors offers a model for assessing and monitoring the evolution of application processes for medical subspecialties interested in expanding and improving their recruitment.