Attitudes of Forensic Fellowship Psychiatry Directors towards an Applicant Match.

Dhruv R Gupta, Philip J Candilis, Octavio Choi, Margarita Abi Zeid Daou, Reena Kapoor, Sean D Cleary, Renée Binder, Peter Ash
{"title":"Attitudes of Forensic Fellowship Psychiatry Directors towards an Applicant Match.","authors":"Dhruv R Gupta, Philip J Candilis, Octavio Choi, Margarita Abi Zeid Daou, Reena Kapoor, Sean D Cleary, Renée Binder, Peter Ash","doi":"10.29158/JAAPL.240053-24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":47554,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","volume":" ","pages":"304-310"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.240053-24","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
法医研究员精神病学主任对申请人匹配的态度。
法医精神病学研究金项目通过非标准化流程招募申请人,不同项目的招募流程各不相同。虽然有截止日期、非正式指导和最新的沟通指南,但在招募实践中,不同地区、小型和大型项目、较新和较成熟的项目之间仍然存在明显的差异。在对研究金申请者进行调查后发现,他们对申请过程的看法不一,因此美国法医研究金主任对他们的同事进行了一次定量与定性相结合的调查,以评估他们对匹配作为一种潜在改进的兴趣以及影响这种兴趣的因素(如项目规模、年龄和未填补的职位)。美国所有 46 个在役项目都对调查做出了回应,结果表明,公平、透明和尽量减少申请人压力等原则得到了广泛支持,对匹配的兴趣几乎完全一致。受访者支持使用中央数据库来规范申请程序,并赞成对内部申请人实行某些例外。关于项目主任对匹配持何种态度的假设结果并不显著,只有项目规模接近显著性。这项针对法医研究员项目主任的新颖综合调查为有意扩大和改善招聘工作的医学亚专科提供了一个评估和监控申请流程演变的模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
29.60%
发文量
92
期刊介绍: The American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law (AAPL, pronounced "apple") is an organization of psychiatrists dedicated to excellence in practice, teaching, and research in forensic psychiatry. Founded in 1969, AAPL currently has more than 1,500 members in North America and around the world.
期刊最新文献
Legal and Ethics Concerns of Psilocybin as Medicine. A Review of the Interpretation of the Canadian Test for Fitness to Stand Trial. Clinical and Legal Considerations When Optimizing Trauma Narratives in Immigration Law Evaluations. Flexibility and Innovation in Decisional Capacity Assessment. Mental Health Service Referral and Treatment Following Screening and Assessment in Juvenile Detention.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1