Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

A consistent challenge that MedBiquitous has been called upon to address is bringing to bear a distributed set of tools and resources in support of health professions education (HPE) and credentialing. Although the MedBiquitous community has answered this call on multiple occasions, the challenge remains that the adoption of the standards and guidelines produced by the community occurs only in niche pockets, rather than by the HPE community at large. All industries have standards, many of which are applicable to HPE. It is our goal to educate the community on the importance of harmonizing standards across industries and acknowledge their impact on HPE.

In support of a vision for a digital ecosystem in health professions education and credentialing, the MedBiquitous community has started working on the MedBiquitous 2030 initiative. 

Concepts for this initiative are outlined in the attached white paper.  This will be available for a 30-day period to allow the community to provide feedback before the working group's charge is finalized.

Lines in the white paper have been numbered for ease of reference. Please utilize the comment section on this page to provide your relevant comments. In order to leave comments, you must be logged in on the MedBiquitous Knowledgebase (link in upper right on desktop layout). For log in assistance, please contact

  • No labels

1 Comment

  1. Overall

    I think it is important to include a statement regarding educational equity and healthcare equity.  MedBiq efforts will contribute to equity and that should be stated explicitly.

    Line 81

    It would be helpful to have a transparent list of who are the “stakeholders” in MedBiq2030.  It is tempting to consider ‘everyone’ to be a stakeholder, but for the purposes of strategic planning for the next 10 years, the list of stakeholders will be more limited.  For example, is this only for the U.S. system of credentialing?

    Line 104-105

    The wording here of “benchmark . . . against peers” suggests that norm-referencing of individuals and programs is a goal.  Yet, doing that would be contrary to CBME principles and is not a use for which MedBiq is suited.

    Line 109-110

    (my stylistic preference) This paragraph would read better if it was formatted as a list of items in a sentence (rather than a series of non-sentences).

    Line 122-127 (and onward)

    The use of the phrase “can be” throughout the Goals section feels indecisive.  Perhaps re-phrasing as “will be” would convey a stronger commitment to accomplish these goals and objectives.