[Selection of trainees for medical specialties; time for a different approach]

Selection procedures for medical specialty training positions shape the future quality and composition of the specialist workforce. Yet selection often relies on opaque, bias-prone tools such as motivation and reference letters, CVs and unstructured interviews. These methods are hard to compare, may promote similarity-based decisions, and disadvantage applicants with limited access to the "hidden curriculum". We argue that current practice is increasingly unjustifiable and propose a structured, evidence-informed alternative, aligned with principles of fairness, transparency and predictive validity. Key elements include predefined competency domains, a standardized anonymized application form, rubric-based assessment, and structured interviews with independent scoring. Importantly, assessment can be done by a committee of up to six members without loss of reliability, while improving efficiency. Finally, we argue that merit should extend beyond research output, explicitly valuing clinical performance, teaching, leadership, innovation and societal impact.