The whole thing, free. No card, no catch.
300 questions, no negative marking — half of them right and you are through. But every qbank has questions. This one shows you why each wrong option is a trap, in a bank authored and sourced from scratch, and tells you honestly how far 150 really is.
An arithmetic model, not a validated predictor — there is no dataset linking preparation to FMGE outcome, and anyone showing you one is guessing. It moves for the reasons your real score moves.
The banks on your shortlist mostly cover the same syllabus at a similar price. The difference is what happens the moment after you answer — and that is the whole game.
Not just the right answer. Each distractor names the condition it WOULD have been right for. That is where the marks actually hide.
Written fresh from primary sources around a new patient, clinician-reviewed. A past paper tells us the concept — it never gives us the question.
Your Path to 150 climbs on evidence and shrinks toward the guess level where you are thinly tested. No one lucky mock inflates it.
Server-held clock, Part A and B, image inspector — the real NBE sitting, not a slideshow of screenshots.
A faithful NBE sitting: Part A and Part B on separate 150-minute clocks, a question matrix, flagging, option strike-through, and an image inspector with zoom, pan, contrast and a measurement reticle. The clock lives on the server — reloading the tab cannot buy you a second.
A projected score weighted by blueprint share, with each subject pulled toward the guess level in proportion to how little you have been tested on it. It climbs on evidence, not on one lucky mock.
Every question you get wrong is queued automatically and returns when you are about to forget it. FSRS, not a fixed ease multiplier.
Every wrong option explained, and what condition it WOULD have been right for. That is where the marks are.
Fast-and-wrong is a different problem from slow-and-wrong. We separate them, because the fix is different.
Short, sourced, cross-linked to the questions they answer. Printable, searchable.
Each shows the formula it used and the paper it came from. Learn the derivation, not the output.
Eligibility, application, exam day, registration after passing — each naming the authority that decides it.
A past paper can tell us which concept was tested. It cannot give us the question — so we do not take it. Every item is written from primary sources around a fresh patient, and the pipeline refuses to publish anything that lacks a source, a reviewer, or an explanation for every distractor.
Written and reviewed by clinicians trained at PGIMER, AIIMS, SGPGIMS and JIPMER — and practising in India, the US, the UK and Canada.
Written from primary sources around a novel patient. Where a past paper suggested the concept, only the year is recorded.
Every wrong option explained and every item sourced — verified automatically, with ongoing sign-off by our clinician panel: doctors trained at PGIMER, AIIMS, SGPGIMS and JIPMER.
Answer positions are re-lettered deterministically, so nobody can pass by learning that the answer is usually A.
Items reach tests once authored, sourced, explained and balance-checked; panel sign-off and blueprint coverage are tracked in the open.
Including the ones with answers that do not flatter us.
No. Every question should be answered. A blank is a guaranteed zero; a guess on a four-option question is worth 0.25 marks on average, so thirty blanks costs you roughly seven or eight marks — often the width of a failure. The submit dialog tells you exactly what your blanks are costing before you confirm.
The whole product is open to everyone — the full question bank, every Grand Test, the tutor, the image inspector and the analytics. No card, no daily cap, no “Pro” tier held back.
The whole product is open while we grow. Make an account to keep your progress and revision across devices.