Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42824819›Full record

ArticlePerspectives on medical education2026

The Wicked Problem of Selection and Competency-Based Education: Applying TRIZ Inversion to the Graduate Medical Education Selection Process.

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, As members of the International Competency-Based Health Professions Educators Collaborative

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Perspectives on medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Holly A Caretta-WeyerStanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9783-5797
Ming-Ka ChanMax Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2989-7766
Mary Ellen J GoldhamerHarvard Kidney Urology Hematology Training Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2648-8791
Alan SchwartzDepartments of Medical Education and Pediatrics, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3809-6637
Teresa M ChanToronto Metropolitan University, Brampton, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6104-462X
Lalena M YarrisOregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1277-2852
Ian W IncollFaculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8082-2976
Arvin DamodaranSchool of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, UNSW Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5067-9483
H Carrie ChenKaiser Permanente Bernard J. Tyson School of Medicine, Pasadena, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1663-1598
As members of the International Competency-Based Health Professions Educators Collaborative

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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.

Indexed as

Competency-Based EducationEducation, Medical, GraduateSchool Admission CriteriaHumans

Identifiers

PMID42824819
PMCPMC13629539

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.