Questioning medical competence: Should the Covid-19 crisis affect the goals of medical education?

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted many societal institutions, including health care and education. Although the pandemic's impact was initially assumed to be temporary, there is growing conviction that medical education might change more permanently. The International Competency-based Medical Education (ICBME) collaborators, scholars devoted to improving physician training, deliberated how the pandemic raises questions about medical competence. We formulated 12 broad-reaching issues for discussion, grouped into micro-, meso-, and macro-level questions. At the individual micro level, we ask questions about adaptability, coping with uncertainty, and the value and limitations of clinical courage. At the institutional meso level, we question whether curricula could include more than core entrustable professional activities (EPAs) and focus on individualized, dynamic, and adaptable portfolios of EPAs that, at any moment, reflect current competence and preparedness for disasters. At the regulatory and societal macro level, should conditions for licensing be reconsidered? Should rules of liability be adapted to match the need for rapid redeployment? We do not propose a blueprint for the future of medical training but rather aim to provoke discussions needed to build a workforce that is competent to cope with future health care crises.

Competency-based time-variable training internationally: Ensuring practical next steps in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Competency-based medical education has been advocated as the future of medical education for nearly a half-century. Inherent to this is the promise that advancement and transitions in training would be defined by readiness to practice rather than by time. Of the logistical problems facing competency-based, time-variable (CBTV) training, enacting time variability may be the largest hurdle to clear. Although it is true that an 'all or nothing' approach to CBTV training would require massive overhauls of both medical education and health care systems, the authors propose that training institutions should gradually evolve within their current environments to incrementally move toward the best version of CBTV training for learners, supervisors, and patients. In support of this evolution, the authors seek to demonstrate the feasibility of advancing toward the goal of realistic CBTV training by detailing examples of successful CBTV training and describing key features of initial steps toward CBTV training implementation.

If we could turn back time: Imagining time-variable, competency-based medical education in the context of COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed a paradox in historical models of medical education: organizations responsible for applying consistent standards for progression have needed to adapt to training environments marked by inconsistency and change. Although some institutions have maintained their traditional requirements, others have accelerated their programs to rush nearly graduated trainees to the front lines. One interpretation of the unplanned shortening of the duration of training programs during a crisis is that standards have been lowered. But it is also possible that these trainees were examined according to the same standards as usual and were judged to have already met them. This paper discusses the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the current workforce, provides an analysis of how competency-based medical education (CBME) in the context of the pandemic might have mitigated wide-scale disruption, and identifies structural barriers to achieving an ideal state. The paper further calls upon universities, health centres, governments, certifying bodies, regulatory authorities, and health care professionals to work collectively on a truly time-variable model of CBME. The pandemic has made clear that time variability in medical education already exists and should be adopted widely and formally. If our systems today had used a framework of outcome competencies, sequenced progression, tailored learning, focused instruction, and programmatic assessment, we may have been even more nimble in changing our systems to care for our patients with COVID-19.

The Hiker's Guide to the RIME Supplement: Choosing Directions in Research.

In this Commentary, the authors seek to build on prior RIME commentaries by considering how researchers transition from worldviews, focal lengths, and research goals to research directions and methodological choices. The authors use the analogy of a hiker to illustrate how different researchers studying a similar phenomenon can choose among different research directions, which lead down different paths and offer different perspectives on a problem. Following the hiker analogy, the authors use the "Research Compass" to categorize the 15 research papers included in the 2020 Research in Medical Education supplement according to their research aim and corresponding methodological approach. The authors then discuss implications of the relative balance of these study types within this supplement and within health professions education research at large, emphasizing the critical importance of studying a topic from multiple vantage points to construct a richer and more nuanced understanding of health professions education challenges. The authors conclude by recognizing the challenges we face in the current era of COVID-19 and by calling health professions education researchers and practitioners to continue our collective efforts to improve learner education and patient care, as we together navigate the unfamiliar terrain of the present day.