Could someone explain the rationale for the current source requirements? They strike me as somewhere between unusually strict and arbitrary. For instance, Osmosis is not mentioned as accepted or prohibited, but I had a suggestion shot down over using it as a source). Not to mention B&B, Sketchy, NBME and others being unacceptable. (Seriously, NBME? Which is straight from the horse’s mouth?)
NBMEs are accepted as long as a accepted source is coupled with it since NBMEs tend to be outdated.
The list is not exhaustive, but only acceptable sources are accepted
The reason for the source rules is that we are trying to target the deck so that it helps with performance on step 1, 2, and 3. It’s made for the tests. Real life situations may vary. Things like nbmes and osmosis tend to get outdated so while they can be used as an initial source, it’s best to have them confirmed with another source
If it’s about board prep, then why would society guidelines be acceptable? Those are definitely not being written for board prep.
If it’s about being current, what evidence is there to suggest that AMBOSS and First Aid are more current than the others? (e.g. With First Aid, like with any textbook, a new edition does not mean content was updated).
Also, is there any mechanism to limit the introduction of mistakes from the acceptable sources to the decks? Because by automatically rejecting something because it’s not an approved source, there are few means to change cards that have errors in them.
Society guidelines are usually referenced by AMBOSS and I’m guessing other sources as well (USPSTF for example for screening guidelines etc.) However, a majority of our changes are from AMBOSS/UWorld/First Aid. I think only a handful of cards have been changed directly using society guidelines as a source
AMBOSS consistently updates its information and articles, UWorld usually lacks behind which is why we add discrepancies in the extra. Sometimes AMBOSS updates information, then months later UWorld updates it to what AMBOSS has it as. First Aid tends to also change minor things from year to year, however we cross-reference from these sources and note discrepancies where necessary.
If there is a mistake, please suggest it with the acceptable sources and we can reach a conclusion.
If we do reject it and you believe it should be what one of the unacceptable sources say, you can do so by right-clicking on the card → go to AnkiHub protect fields → select the field you want to protect → add it yourself and it won’t be overwritten
I hope this answers your question!
Yes, but the boards will test based on these guidelines. I had a step 2 question that was related to a society guideline that changed just the year prior.
Ahmed answered this appropriately. We did that because they seem to be the most up to date
We do what we can to double check everything but understandably can’t always be perfect. I do think we should allow for “non-approved” sources if there is an elaborate discussion on why it needs to change and good rationale that can be backed up. We have accepted those in the past. Osmosis, however, is not a source I would consider trustworthy enough on it’s own
1 Like