At minimum we’ve altered the text of this card twice already in the last like two weeks. It’s a real hard sell to say we’re going to do it yet again, much less in short order. Keep in mind every single one of these goes out to 10,000 plus users. It’s already bad that we pushed out a change and then retracted it.
Second from that, UWorld doesn’t mention the cingulate at all.
It was the forebrain card that we modified twice - the limbic system was just listed in that card. I don’t think anything has been done to this card recently from its change history. Totally can see how they can be mixed up though very similar cloze structure and both cards have the exact same image in the extra section. Trust me I don’t want to touch that forebrain card again 
. If UWorld doesn’t mention the anterior cingulate cortex though it probably doesn’t make sense to include. Thanks for taking a look for it. I don’t have access to the UBooks so unfortunately can’t cross reference them before making a suggestion. Just thought I’d throw it out there since Kaplan chooses to highlight it. I think the image might still be a nice change though!
Also the most recent addition, septal nuclei, was based on the Kaplan book so it made sense to me to at least suggest/discuss the anterior cingulate cortex because it was also one of the 4 primary structures of the limbic system listed.
We also have this card in the deck which also influenced my decision to at least suggest it.
Ahhh, okay. Lolol, I was like oh man this card is gonna haunt me.
It gives us a bit of a pickle just because Kaplan mentions the cingulate cortex, though neither Khan nor UWorld mention it (at all).
I can send you the UWorld books if you want them for general use, and/or cross-referencing. I do agree that the image is a nice upgrade. 
Digging into it a bit I see that there are some basic issues at hand (this hews outside of the MCAT a bit, but): there isn’t a full universal agreement on what, exactly, is comprised of the limbic system. Some models apparently do, or do not, include the anterior cingulate.
My immediate thoughts, though open to hear yours: if there is discrepancy in the boundary of inclusion it’s not likely to be testable, but this might be one of those moments where we add a note in the Extra field about the discrepancy (which I think may be helpful as a habit, when we run into similar issues).
I.e. something like ‘Kaplan (2023) lists the anterior cingulate cortex as also being part of the limbic system’.
Keeping it as a note in the extra section makes sense to me! Especially since the extra section isn’t too busy in this card so doesn’t feel terrible adding more text.
Only other note I’ll add is that I think we’ll be better-served by adding the annum edition, rather than ordinal. IIRC Kaplan doesn’t always necessarily linearly count editions for each year, but they do commonly list the exam year for which the books are intended.
It’s been a while since I’ve read that, but at the very least the calendar year is typically prominently given visually on various copies of the book
Ah good to know. Mine don’t say I big date on the front page but I see a lot do from pics online lol. Idk why not.
Now I’m curious: are you using a super old, or super new, edition?
Example of what I typically see:
I bought it from the Kaplan site and have the ebooks im so confused lol.
Lolol, I’m so intrigued now
I will admit I may or may not have paid for mine, but that’s neither here nor there
they came with their online course thing which I have unfortunately barely used after some review.
its 2024-2025 edition. ill throw it in.