Medical Ethics - Treatment Decisions
Understanding Context-Dependent Assessment
This format presents the SAME 8 treatment options across 3 different patient scenarios. However, the correct answers change dramatically based on patient context (age, health status, preferences, prognosis). This assesses nuanced, context-aware clinical reasoning rather than simple memorization. Students who select the same options for all scenarios demonstrate context-blindness and receive a penalty.
Shared Treatment Option Pool (Used for All 3 Scenarios)
A. Aggressive chemotherapy
B. Surgery with curative intent
C. Palliative care only
D. Experimental clinical trial
E. Radiation therapy
F. Watchful waiting (active surveillance)
G. Combination therapy (chemotherapy + radiation)
H. Hospice referral
1
Scenario 1: Young, Healthy, Aggressive Cancer
Age: 45 years old
Cancer Type: Early-stage localized aggressive lymphoma
Overall Health: Excellent (no comorbidities)
Performance Status: ECOG 0 (fully active)
Family Support: Strong (married, two children)
Patient Preference: "I want to beat this. Do whatever it takes."
Prognosis: 70-80% cure rate with aggressive treatment
Which treatment approaches are APPROPRIATE to discuss with this patient? (Select ALL that apply)
A. Aggressive chemotherapy
B. Surgery with curative intent
C. Palliative care only
D. Experimental clinical trial
E. Radiation therapy
F. Watchful waiting (active surveillance)
G. Combination therapy (chemotherapy + radiation)
H. Hospice referral
2
Scenario 2: Elderly, Multiple Comorbidities
Age: 82 years old
Cancer Type: Same type as Scenario 1 (aggressive lymphoma)
Overall Health: Poor (severe heart failure, dementia, diabetes)
Performance Status: ECOG 3 (capable of limited self-care only)
Life Expectancy: 6-12 months even without cancer
Advance Directive: Clearly states "No aggressive treatment, comfort care only"
Family Agreement: Supportive of comfort-focused care
Which treatment approaches are APPROPRIATE to discuss with this patient? (Select ALL that apply)
A. Aggressive chemotherapy
B. Surgery with curative intent
C. Palliative care only
D. Experimental clinical trial
E. Radiation therapy
F. Watchful waiting (active surveillance)
G. Combination therapy (chemotherapy + radiation)
H. Hospice referral
3
Scenario 3: Moderate Case, Uncertain Prognosis
Age: 60 years old
Cancer Type: Intermediate-stage, moderate aggressiveness
Overall Health: Fair (controlled hypertension, mild kidney disease)
Performance Status: ECOG 1 (some limitations but mostly active)
Prognosis: Uncertain - 40-60% cure rate with treatment
Patient Question: "What would you do if this was your family member, doctor?"
Context: Patient wants full information about all reasonable options
Which treatment approaches are APPROPRIATE to discuss with this patient? (Select ALL that apply)
A. Aggressive chemotherapy
B. Surgery with curative intent
C. Palliative care only
D. Experimental clinical trial
E. Radiation therapy
F. Watchful waiting (active surveillance)
G. Combination therapy (chemotherapy + radiation)
H. Hospice referral
Scoring: Context-Awareness is Key
Component 1: Per-Scenario Accuracy (75%)
Scenario 1: (Correct selections / 3) × 25%
Scenario 2: (Correct selections / 3) × 25%
Scenario 3: (Correct selections / 6) × 25%
Example: If you get all 3 scenarios 100% correct = 75%
Component 2: Cross-Scenario Awareness Bonus (25%)
+10% if you select DIFFERENT options for Scenarios 1 vs 2 (shows context awareness)
+10% if you select MORE options for Scenario 3 than 1 or 2 (uncertainty management)
+5% if you avoid selecting palliative/hospice for Scenario 1 (appropriate exclusion)
Maximum Bonus: 25%
Penalty: Context-Blindness (-15%)
-15% if you select the SAME options for all 3 scenarios
This indicates failure to adapt reasoning to different contexts - a critical clinical reasoning flaw
SAMPLE STUDENT SCORES
Student A (Context-Aware): S1=3/3, S2=3/3, S3=6/6 + All bonuses = 100%
Student B (Partial Context): S1=2/3, S2=3/3, S3=4/6 + Some bonuses = 78%
Student C (Context-Blind): Selected B,D,G for all scenarios - Penalty = 35%
Why Context-Dependent SATA Works
  • Nuanced Reasoning: Assesses ability to adapt knowledge to different contexts
  • Prevents Memorization: Same options, different answers - can't just memorize
  • Clinical Realism: Mirrors real medical decision-making (context determines appropriateness)
  • Ethical Assessment: Tests patient-centered care and autonomy respect
  • Diagnostic Value: Reveals if student has rigid vs. flexible thinking
  • Efficiency: Assesses 3 scenarios with 1 option pool (reusable infrastructure)
  • Professional Judgment: Reflects real-world complexity (no one-size-fits-all solutions)
Answer Key Summary
Scenario 1: B, D, G (curative focus)
Scenario 2: C, F, H (comfort focus)
Scenario 3: A, B, D, E, F, G (wide range)
Key Insight: Notice how options B and D appear in Scenarios 1 and 3 but NOT Scenario 2, while options C and H appear ONLY in Scenario 2. This demonstrates true context-dependency.