ISSUE. There has been much recent discussion on the funding of medical education. There has also been much discussion about the funding of higher education more generally. EVIDENCE. The topics of discussion have included the rising costs of education; who should pay; the various potential models of funding; and how best to ensure maximum returns from investment. IMPLICATIONS. Medical education has largely followed the emerging models of funding for higher education. However there are important reasons why the funding models for higher education may not suit medical education. These reasons include the fact that medical education is as important to the public as it is to the learner; the range of funding sources available to medical schools; the strict regulation of medical education; and the fact that the privatisation and commercialisation of higher education may not been in keeping with the social goals of medical schools and the agenda of diversification within the medical student population.

E-learning in healthcare professional education still seems like it is a new innovation but the reality is that e-learning has been around for as long as the internet has been around. This is approximately twenty years and so it is probably appropriate to now take stock and consider what the future of e-learning in healthcare professional education might be. One likely occurrence is that there will be more formats, more interactive technology, and sometimes game-based learning. Another future of healthcare professional education will likely be in simulation. Like other forms of technology outside of medicine, the cost of e-learning in healthcare professional education will fall rapidly. E-learning will also become more adaptive in the future and so will deliver educational content based on learners' exact needs. The future of e-learning will also be mobile. Increasingly in the future e-learning will be blended with face to face education.

Medical education is expensive. Its expense has led many stakeholders to speculate on how costs could be reduced. In an ideal world such decisions would be made on sound evidence; however this is impossible in the absence of evidence. Sometimes practice will be informed by policy, but policy will not always be evidence based. So how is policy in the field of cost and value in medical education actually developed? The foremost influence on policy in cost and value should be evidence-based knowledge. Unfortunately policy is sometimes influenced by what might at best be termed tradition and at worst inertia. Another influence on policy will be people - but some individuals may have more influence than others. A further influence on policy in this field is events, and mainly events that have gone wrong. One final influence on emerging policy in medical education cost analysis is that of the media.

In recent years a growing number of papers have started to appear in the literature on the subject of cost and value in medical education. However many of the articles describe tactical projects within specific areas. As a result the generalisability of such articles is often questionable. Lack of generalisability will mean that progress in research and practice in this field will be slow. Generalisability of cost-value analyses in any discipline is not always straightforward. However reports on cost and value in medical education should ideally ensure absolute clarity with regard to study centres, enrolment of learners, alternative options, perspectives of stakeholders, resources used and their costs, instruments used, variability, and any problems with the analyses (such as incomplete data).