Validity and fairness of Ukraine’s Krok examinations in the national medical qualification system during war

Abstract

High-stakes medical examinations fulfill their public-protection function only when their scores support defensible decisions about candidates. Examination difficulty alone does not establish assessment quality. The central questions are whether an observed score represents the intended medical knowledge with sufficient consistency and whether the resulting pass–fail decision is supported by a defensible validity argument. These questions are particularly important when examinations take place during prolonged armed conflict.