MedEd Insights
MedEd Insights
Podcast Description
Welcome to MedEd Insights, the podcast where cutting-edge research meets practical application in the world of medical education! Join us each episode, as we dive deep into the latest studies and trends with the authors and experts driving innovation in the field. Whether you're an educator, student, or just passionate about the future of healthcare training, our discussions will provide you with valuable insights to stay ahead in this ever-evolving field. So, tune in to discover the state of how we train the next generation of healthcare professionals!
Podcast Insights
Content Themes
The show focuses on medical education trends, instructional design, and academic innovation, with episodes discussing topics such as orthopaedic surgery curriculum modernization, the integration of spaced repetition tools like Anki in pharmacology studies, and rethinking how medical students approach learning. Episode examples include a guest from UChicago discussing OrthoACCESS 2.0 and a Yale resident exploring learning strategies.
Welcome to MedEd Insights, the podcast where cutting-edge research meets practical application in the world of medical education! Join Shankar and Thomas each episode, as we dive deep into the latest studies and trends with the authors and experts driving innovation in the field. Whether you’re an educator, student, or just passionate about the future of healthcare training, our discussions will provide you with valuable insights to stay ahead in this ever-evolving field. So, tune in to discover the state of how we train the next generation of healthcare professionals!
Medical exams are often judged by one gold standard: reliability.
More questions, higher precision, stronger defensibility. But what if that metric is optimized for the wrong goal?
In this episode of MedEd Insights, host Shankar speaks with Dr. Schauber, Associate Professor of Health Professions Education at the University of Oslo, about a deceptively simple question: If most medical exams are pass/fail, why are they designed using a metric that doesn’t even account for the pass/fail decision?
Drawing from his paper ”Challenging the Norm: Length of Exams Determined by Classification Accuracy or Reliability,” Dr. Schauber unpacks why reliability almost always pushes exams toward excessive length, and how classification accuracy offers a more honest way to think about misclassification, failure rates, and fairness. Together, we explore the ethical consequences of false passes and false fails, the hidden politics of exam “defensibility,” and what it would mean to design assessments around the decisions that actually matter.
Because sometimes the hardest question in medical education isn’t how precise an exam is, but rather, what decision it’s truly designed to make.
Article link: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40467533/
Disclaimer
This podcast’s information is provided for general reference and was obtained from publicly accessible sources. The Podcast Collaborative neither produces nor verifies the content, accuracy, or suitability of this podcast. Views and opinions belong solely to the podcast creators and guests.
For a complete disclaimer, please see our Full Disclaimer on the archive page. The Podcast Collaborative bears no responsibility for the podcast’s themes, language, or overall content. Listener discretion is advised. Read our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy for more details.