The core curriculum is defined as that which is common rather than essentia
l. It is considered at different levels: institutional, national and global
. As its size is inversely proportional to variability in healthcare needs,
the core becomes smaller as the geographical unit becomes larger. A ration
ale for identifying the core is established at all three levels. The risk o
f stereotypy among curricula and dampening of innovation can be avoided if
a significant part of the curriculum is elective, and if schools are free t
o determine how the core should be achieved. Focusing exclusively on the mi
nimum discourages excellence. Many of the potential disadvantages of a core
curriculum can be avoided if the core is combined with options. The core s
hould emphasize higher-order cognitive and process skills and should be rev
iewed intermittently in the light of trends in healthcare and education. It
should be developed in consul tati on wi th curriculum implementers using
a competency-based approach. In developing international standards, societa
l relevance of the curriculum should not be sacrificed at the altar of stan
dardization. The scientific bases of medicine, process skills and desirable
practices in educating the basic doctor are fertile areas in which to look
for international standards.