"'In order to establish liability for medical malpractice, a plaintiff must prove that the defendant deviated or departed from accepted community standards of practice and that such departure was a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries'" (Gruen v Brathwaite, 215 A.D.3d 927, 928, quoting Keun Young Kim v Lenox Hill Hosp., 156 A.D.3d 774, 774-775).

We agree with plaintiffs that it was improper for Supreme Court to weigh the education, training and experience of plaintiffs' out-of-state experts as they are all board certified in the defendants' areas of practice, and there is no cause to believe their opinions are unreliable. "It is sufficient if the expert attests to familiarity with either the standard of care in the locality or to a minimum standard applicable locally, statewide, or nationally" (M.C. v Huntington Hosp., 175 A.D.3d 578, 580-581 [2d Dept 2019] [citations omitted]; see Gruen v Brathwaite, 215 A.D.3d 927, 929 [2d Dept 2023]). Luciani further opined that Elsagga and Santiago deviated from the standard of care when they did not "follow the [beta human chorionic gonadotropin (hereinafter BHCG)] levels and monitor [Scott] and do repeat imaging studies" when the laparoscopy did not locate an ectopic pregnancy.