Great Resource

[MattStammers]

Firstly well done. I have read through nearly all the links in your readme and they mostly work. I have also read your paper and the ones you have acknowledged at the bottom. Your paper is probably the most clearly structured.

However, there are a few issues. Firstly several of the links appear under multiple headings but some of the headings don't really make sense. For example the Korean Journal of Medical Education 2023 article appears both in medical education (where it fits) and medical translation where it fits less well. I understand why have done this but it makes the guide less robust. It would be better to have each article tagged only once under a heading and for the sometimes arbitrary duplication to be reduced.

Secondly some of the links already fail such as healthcare magic where even the derivative of this no longer seems to exist.

Thirdly, there are some articles which are very heavily vision based such as the VisionFM paper. I really enjoyed this paper but it is very different in emphasis compared to say the RadFM paper which is very much focused on text. It's up to you whether you continue to include it but this paper did feel slightly out of place and probably would have been excluded if this was a systematic review.

Finally, after reading all of it I was left with the distinct impression that the 'what's missing' aspect of this is far bigger than is currently realised. However, you have done a great job to start to repair that deficit and for that I am grateful. Thus, if you only choose to address point 2 I would fully understand your decision because none of the rest of it is actually broken and most of these are stylistic things.