The PAPERs Podcast

Welcome to our special year-end episode of the Papers Podcast! In this episode, our hosts Jason, Lara, Linda, and Jon take a retrospective journey through the academic highlights of 2024. Each host selected two papers that didn’t make it into previous episodes but are too good to miss. If you’re looking for inspiration or want to catch up on impactful scholarship in health professions education, this is your guide! 

---

1. Writing beyond the monotone: Tools to elevate your style 

Article: Varpio, L. (2024). Creating Effects in Your Writing—Tools to “Use” (or Not). Perspectives on Medical Education, 13(1).

This engaging article from the Writers’ Craft series dives into the art of dynamic and impactful writing. Lara Varpio explores how tools like italics, bold text, dashes, parentheses, and scare quotes can transform dry, monotonic writing into a lively conversation with readers. Inspired by frustration with improper use of scare quotes in academic papers, Varpio delves into the origins of this work, aiming to equip writers with the skills to add flair and precision to their narratives.

Key takeaways: The hosts collectively admired this paper’s practical value and its emphasis on writing as a conversation. They appreciated its reminder that good writing can bring theatricality and nuance to academic work, turning what might otherwise be mundane into something engaging and impactful. The backstory of how Lara developed the paper added a personal touch, resonating with their shared experiences of common writing pitfalls.

2. Planetary health in medical curricula: Filling the gaps with a report card

Article: Irlam, J., Reid, S., & Rother, H.-A. (2024). Education about planetary health and sustainable healthcare in low- and middle-income countries: Planetary Health Report Card assessment of perceptions at University of Cape Town Faculty of Health Sciences. Education for Health, 37(1), Article 1.

This important study sheds light on the integration of planetary health into medical education in low- and middle-income countries. Using the Planetary Health Report Card, the authors reveal significant gaps in curriculum, research, and advocacy efforts. The findings highlight the urgent need to bridge these gaps and make sustainability a core component of medical education. 

Key takeaways: The discussion underscored how this paper is both a call to action and a wake-up call for institutions. The hosts noted the stark gaps revealed by the Planetary Health Report Card and how this resonates with growing student awareness and expectations around sustainability. Jason celebrated the innovation of medical students who developed the Planetary Health Report Card, showcasing their drive to hold institutions accountable for sustainability.

3. Dear Reader: Mastering moments of connection in writing 

Article: Lingard, L. (2023). Metacommentary: Identifying and Mastering “Dear Reader” Moments. Perspectives on Medical Education, 12(1).

Lorelei Lingard’s paper explores “dear reader” moments—those crucial junctures where authors anticipate potential misunderstandings and guide readers toward the intended meaning. This insightful piece provides strategies for identifying these moments and addressing them effectively, ensuring clarity and impact in academic writing. 

Key notes from hosts: Jason found the concept transformative, likening it to seeing the “Matrix” of writing clarity. Lara praised Lingard’s exceptional ability to turn academic writing into a dialogue with readers, a skill that is often overlooked but essential for impactful scholarship. The idea of anticipating and guiding the reader’s journey resonated strongly, as it reframes writing from merely presenting information to fostering understanding. Jon appreciated how the paper gave language to common writing challenges, making it an essential resource for scholars striving to connect with their audiences.

4. Fast and right: Rethinking clinical reasoning models

Article: Norman, G., Pelaccia, T., Wyer, P., & Sherbino, J. (2024). Dual process models of clinical reasoning: The central role of knowledge in diagnostic expertise. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 30(5), 788–796.

This thought-provoking paper challenges the assumption that faster decision-making leads to more diagnostic errors. By examining System 1 and System 2 reasoning, the authors argue that expertise often improves speed and accuracy, while overemphasis on slow, analytical thinking can hinder performance. The study advocates for knowledge-based interventions to reduce diagnostic errors. 

Key notes from hosts: Jason dubbed the debate “The Diagnostic Dissension,” comparing it to the “Hubble Tension” in astrophysics. He highlighted how this paper reframes the debate on diagnostic reasoning, challenging long-held assumptions about cognitive biases and speed. They emphasized the real-world implications for clinical practice, noting that expertise and knowledge often trump slow, deliberate analysis. The hosts synthesized their views around the dual-edged nature of AI in education.Jon called the paper the culmination of 15 years of research expressing humble pride in its contribution to improving patient outcomes while debunking myths about cognitive biases.

5. How transferability shapes qualitative research 

Article: Stalmeijer, R. E., Brown, M. E. L., & O’Brien, B. C. (2024). How to discuss transferability of qualitative research in health professions education. The Clinical Teacher, 21(6), e13762.

This paper delves into the concept of transferability in qualitative research, focusing on how findings can resonate beyond their original context. The authors offer practical guidance on framing results, evoking resonance, and engaging theoretically to ensure that qualitative studies have broader relevance and impact. 

Key notes from hosts: Jon praised the paper’s systematic approach to enhancing transferability. and its practical steps for researchers. Linda highlighted its accessibility, calling it a great starting point for qualitative research newcomers. Lara commended the Clinical Teacher’s Triptych series for making qualitative research techniques more approachable and actionable for educators.

6. AI in Medical Education: The promise and the pitfalls

Article: Lucas, H. C., Upperman, J. S., & Robinson, J. R. (2024). A systematic review of large language models and their implications in medical education. Medical Education, 58(11), 1276–1285.

This systematic review examines the implications of large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT for medical education. It explores their applications for learners, educators, and researchers, while also addressing challenges such as hallucinations, ethical concerns, and academic integrity. The paper captures the transformative potential of AI while advocating for cautious adoption. 

Key takeaways: The hosts synthesized their views around the dual-edged nature of AI in education. Linda described the paper as “timely and comprehensive,” emphasizing its importance as a snapshot of LLMs’ impact on medical education. Lara expressed optimism about the possibilities of LLMs while urging educators to adapt their practices thoughtfully. Jason highlighted the need to balance innovation with vigilance, warning against over-reliance on these tools. 

7. Professionalism redefined: Intersectionality and activism

Article: Mokhachane, M., Wyatt, T., Kuper, A., Green-Thompson, L., & George, A. (2024). Graduates’ reflections on professionalism and identity: Intersections of race, gender, and activism. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 36(3), 312–322.

This paper critiques traditional definitions of professionalism in medicine, highlighting how these can marginalize individuals who challenge norms. By examining the intersections of race, gender, and activism, the authors advocate for more inclusive and flexible approaches to defining professional behavior in health professions education. 

Key takeaways: Lara celebrated the paper’s bold critique of professionalism, emphasizing its call to challenge inequitable norms in medical education while proposing a more inclusive framework for evaluating professional behavior. Jason described it as a powerful and necessary contribution to ongoing debates about equity and inclusion. The use of first-person narrative to center the lead researcher’s voice was also praised as a refreshing departure from traditional academic writing.

8. What counts as Evidence? Rethinking HPE Scholarship

Article: Ellaway, R. H., O’Brien, B. C., Sherbino, J., Maggio, L. A., Artino, A. R. J., Nimmon, L., Park, Y. S., Young, M., & Thomas, A. (2024). Is there a problem with evidence in health professions education? Academic Medicine, 99(8), 841.

This paper tackles ongoing debates about evidence in health professions education (HPE). Using a triple-loop framework, it challenges scholars to rethink the quality, relevance, and assumptions underlying research priorities in the field. The study emphasizes the need for context-aware and accessible scholarship. 

Key takeaways: Jon reflected on the intense collaborative process behind the paper, noting how it reshaped his thinking on evidence-based practice. Jason praised its innovative triple-loop framework, emphasizing the need for scholars to question their research priorities and methodologies. Lara acknowledged the paper’s relevance to both researchers and educators, urging readers to engage deeply with its implications.