Fellowship directors' perceptions of the 2005 NRMP Radiology Fellowship Match

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study is to gauge radiology fellowship directors' experiences with the fellowship application process and perceptions of the National Resident Matching Program Radiology Fellowship Match, as well as compare these perceptions with those of senior residents. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An electronic survey was sent to 291 members of the Association of Program Directors in Radiology. Responses were compared directly with an earlier survey of senior residents who participated in the same cycle of the Fellowship Match. RESULTS: Sixty-seven respondents participated in the survey. Based on our estimates of the total number of US-based radiology subspecialty fellowship programs, this represents between 15.3% (67/438) and 24.2% (67/277) of all fellowship directors. Approximately three quarters (52/76 directors; 77.6%) participated in the Fellowship Match. Respondents believe that the match process makes the process fairer for all applicants (31/43 respondents; 70.5%) and primarily benefits residents (30/76 respondents; 60.0%), a significant difference compared with senior residents (P < .01). The majority of fellowship directors favor the current calendar and the ability to select internal candidates outside the Match. The majority of respondents believe that programs generally are not abiding by the rules of the Match (22/43 respondents; 51.2%), and at least 15 instances of rule violations were reported. A majority of fellowship directors favor continuing the Match in some form (26/42 respondents; 61.9%). CONCLUSION: Although there are significant differences in perception of the Match process between fellowship directors and senior residents, the majority of fellowship directors favor continuing the Match in some form. Several potential solutions, including explicit declaration of the number of available positions and strict enforcement of Match rules, may help improve the process in the future.