Holly A Caretta-Weyer, Ming-Ka Chan, Mary Ellen J Goldhamer, Alan Schwartz, Teresa M Chan, Lalena M Yarris, Ian W Incoll, Arvin Damodaran, H Carrie Chen
{"title":"The Wicked Problem of Selection and Competency-Based Education: Applying TRIZ Inversion to the Graduate Medical Education Selection Process.","authors":"Holly A Caretta-Weyer, Ming-Ka Chan, Mary Ellen J Goldhamer, Alan Schwartz, Teresa M Chan, Lalena M Yarris, Ian W Incoll, Arvin Damodaran, H Carrie Chen","doi":"10.5334/pme.2596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Graduate medical education (GME) selection processes may pose significant barriers to implementing competency-based health professions education (CBHPE). Current selection metrics are largely nonpredictive of future success, and the removal of clerkship grades has given rise to a shadow economy of effort focused on publications, research hours, and other activities that detract from clinical training. This misalignment between selection practices and CBHPE principles constitutes a wicked problem that requires innovative approaches to develop new solutions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a TRIZ (Theory of Inventive Problem Solving) exercise, a Liberating Structure that challenges assumptions by asking what would make a process fail spectacularly. Eight participants representing three countries, two continents, and four medical specialties convened via video conference in October 2025. Participants served as proxies for key stakeholder groups (students, program directors, medical school leadership, and patients/society), identified elements of the worst-possible selection system, compared them to current practices, and proposed solutions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants identified numerous elements characterizing suboptimal selection systems, including inequitable and biased processes, arbitrary decision-making, gaming of metrics, resource-intensive processes that fail to differentiate candidates, misinformation from training sites, and prioritization of self-interest over patient needs. Many of these elements were recognized as present in current GME selection systems worldwide.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Recommendations to align selection with CBHPE included embedding social accountability throughout selection, leveraging coproduced competency frameworks, prioritizing workforce diversity, ensuring equity in assessment and selection, incentivizing a growth mindset through a transparent learner handover, and implementing structural innovations, including preference signaling or potentially lottery systems, to better align CBHPE and selection.</p>","PeriodicalId":48532,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Medical Education","volume":"15 1","pages":"970-985"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13629539/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.2596","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Graduate medical education (GME) selection processes may pose significant barriers to implementing competency-based health professions education (CBHPE). Current selection metrics are largely nonpredictive of future success, and the removal of clerkship grades has given rise to a shadow economy of effort focused on publications, research hours, and other activities that detract from clinical training. This misalignment between selection practices and CBHPE principles constitutes a wicked problem that requires innovative approaches to develop new solutions.
Methods: We conducted a TRIZ (Theory of Inventive Problem Solving) exercise, a Liberating Structure that challenges assumptions by asking what would make a process fail spectacularly. Eight participants representing three countries, two continents, and four medical specialties convened via video conference in October 2025. Participants served as proxies for key stakeholder groups (students, program directors, medical school leadership, and patients/society), identified elements of the worst-possible selection system, compared them to current practices, and proposed solutions.
Results: Participants identified numerous elements characterizing suboptimal selection systems, including inequitable and biased processes, arbitrary decision-making, gaming of metrics, resource-intensive processes that fail to differentiate candidates, misinformation from training sites, and prioritization of self-interest over patient needs. Many of these elements were recognized as present in current GME selection systems worldwide.
Discussion: Recommendations to align selection with CBHPE included embedding social accountability throughout selection, leveraging coproduced competency frameworks, prioritizing workforce diversity, ensuring equity in assessment and selection, incentivizing a growth mindset through a transparent learner handover, and implementing structural innovations, including preference signaling or potentially lottery systems, to better align CBHPE and selection.
期刊介绍：
Perspectives on Medical Education mission is support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices.
Official journal of the The Netherlands Association of Medical Education (NVMO).
Perspectives on Medical Education is a non-profit Open Access journal with no charges for authors to submit or publish an article, and the full text of all articles is freely available immediately upon publication, thanks to the sponsorship of The Netherlands Association for Medical Education.
Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy.
Perspectives on Medical Education positions itself at the dynamic intersection of educational research and clinical education. While other journals in the health professional education domain orient predominantly to education researchers or to clinical educators, Perspectives positions itself at the collaborative interface between these perspectives. This unique positioning reflects the journal’s mission to support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices. Reflecting this mission, the journal both welcomes original research papers arising from scholarly collaborations among clinicians, teachers and researchers and papers providing resources to develop the community’s ability to conduct such collaborative research. The journal’s audience includes researchers and practitioners: researchers who wish to explore challenging questions of health professions education and clinical teachers who wish to both advance their practice and envision for themselves a collaborative role in scholarly educational innovation. This audience of researchers, clinicians and educators is both international and interdisciplinary.
The journal has a long history. In 1982, the journal was founded by the Dutch Association for Medical Education, as a Dutch language journal (Netherlands Journal of Medical Education). As a Dutch journal it fuelled educational research and innovation in the Netherlands. It is one of the factors for the Dutch success in medical education. In 2012, it widened its scope, transforming into an international English language journal. The journal swiftly became international in all aspects: the readers, authors, reviewers and editorial board members.
The editorial board members represent the different parental disciplines in the field of medical education, e.g. clinicians, social scientists, biomedical scientists, statisticians and linguists. Several of them are leading scholars. Three of the editors are in the top ten of most cited authors in the medical education field. Two editors were awarded the Karolinska Institute Prize for Research. Presently, Erik Driessen leads the journal as Editor in Chief.
Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy. It is sponsored by theThe Netherlands Association of Medical Education and offers free manuscript submission.
Perspectives on Medical Education positions itself at the dynamic intersection of educational research and clinical education. While other journals in the health professional education domain orient predominantly to education researchers or to clinical educators, Perspectives positions itself at the collaborative interface between these perspectives. This unique positioning reflects the journal’s mission to support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices. Reflecting this mission, the journal both welcomes original research papers arising from scholarly collaborations among clinicians, teachers and researchers and papers providing resources to develop the community’s ability to conduct such collaborative research. The journal’s audience includes researchers and practitioners: researchers who wish to explore challenging questions of health professions education and clinical teachers who wish to both advance their practice and envision for themselves a collaborative role in scholarly educational innovation. This audience of researchers, clinicians and educators is both international and interdisciplinary.
The journal has a long history. In 1982, the journal was founded by the Dutch Association for Medical Education, as a Dutch language journal (Netherlands Journal of Medical Education). As a Dutch journal it fuelled educational research and innovation in the Netherlands. It is one of the factors for the Dutch success in medical education. In 2012, it widened its scope, transforming into an international English language journal. The journal swiftly became international in all aspects: the readers, authors, reviewers and editorial board members.
The editorial board members represent the different parental disciplines in the field of medical education, e.g. clinicians, social scientists, biomedical scientists, statisticians and linguists. Several of them are leading scholars. Three of the editors are in the top ten of most cited authors in the medical education field. Two editors were awarded the Karolinska Institute Prize for Research. Presently, Erik Driessen leads the journal as Editor in Chief.
Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy. It is sponsored by theThe Netherlands Association of Medical Education and offers free manuscript submission.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
