You are presenting at journal club and a colleague has selected a meta-analysis showing that a commonly used drug is ineffective. Some consultants in the room are sceptical. How do you facilitate a balanced critical appraisal?

Tips to guide your answer

- This scenario tests critical appraisal skills in a social context, which is more realistic than asking you to list the components of a CONSORT checklist.

- Interviewers want to see that you understand the specific strengths and weaknesses of meta-analyses (pooling of data, heterogeneity, publication bias, quality of included studies), that you can present evidence even-handedly when opinions are divided, and that you can facilitate constructive debate rather than simply defending a position.

- Strong answers will acknowledge the hierarchy of evidence while explaining why even high-level evidence requires scrutiny.

Sign in to unlock speak mode

Create account Sign in

How to approach this Shared interview question

This motivation question is common in NHS interviews because it reveals how you think under interview pressure, not just what facts you can recall. Use "You are presenting at journal club and a colleague has selected a meta-analysis showing..." as the anchor for a concise answer with a clear opening, a clinical or professional structure, and a reflective close.

What the panel is testing

A strong motivation answer is specific to the post. Link your experience to the service, explain why the timing is right, and show that you understand the realities of the rota, supervision, learning opportunities, and patient group. For shared NHS interview questions, keep the answer portable across roles. Use one relevant example, explain your reasoning, and make the link to safe patient care explicit.

Connect your motivation to the actual role, patient group, and department rather than giving a generic career answer.
Show that you understand the pressures of NHS work and still have a realistic reason for applying.
Finish by explaining what you can contribute from the first few months in post.

How to structure your answer

For a motivation prompt, aim for a short opening sentence, then two or three evidence-led points, then a final reflection. If you use STAR, keep the result and reflection as strong as the situation. If it is a clinical scenario, say what you would do now, what you would do next, and how you would keep the patient safe while help is coming.

Open by naming the main issue in the question.
Give a structured response rather than a memorised script.
End with escalation, documentation, learning, or follow-up.

Common mistakes to avoid

The weakest answers usually stay too vague, ignore the specific role, or miss the safety issue hidden in the question. Do not use this page to memorise a perfect paragraph. Use it to rehearse the shape of a safe answer, then adapt it to your own experience and the post you are applying for.

This scenario tests critical appraisal skills in a social context, which is more realistic than asking you to list the components of a CONSORT checklist.
Interviewers want to see that you understand the specific strengths and weaknesses of meta-analyses (pooling of data, heterogeneity, publication bias, quality of included studies), that you can present evidence even-handedly when opinions are divided, and that you can facilitate constructive debate rather than simply defending a position.
Strong answers will acknowledge the hierarchy of evidence while explaining why even high-level evidence requires scrutiny.