Practice MMI Interview Questions (With Expert Answers)

Updated on: December 3, 2023
Photo of author
Written By Dr Ollie

Every article is fact-checked by a medical professional. However, inaccuracies may still persist.

Completing practice MMI interview questions is a vital way to prepare yourself for an upcoming medical school interview.

The MMI scenarios below are all based on MMI cases that have been used at UK Medical Schools as part of the interview selection process.

I would recommend that you practice the scenarios before reviewing the answers, comparing your performance with that of an ā€˜averageā€™ and ā€˜excellentā€™ medical school applicant.

You might also want to check out my complete guide to medical schools MMIs here.

MMI Practice Station: “The Stolen Medication”

Station Setup:
You enter a room to find an actor playing the role of a nurse visibly upset. The actor explains that they discovered a fellow nurse stealing medication from the hospital’s supply room. They are torn between reporting this behaviour and maintaining trust among colleagues. You have 7 minutes to discuss the situation with the actor.

Question Stem:
“Thank you for coming in. I’m really troubled by something I witnessed. I caught a nurse taking medication from the supply room. I’m not sure what to do ā€“ should I report this, potentially jeopardising our working relationship, or should I confront the nurse directly? What would you advise?”

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ability to navigate an ethical dilemma, communicate effectively, and demonstrate empathy. The station tests the candidate’s professionalism, moral reasoning, and interpersonal skills.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Balancing Professionalism and Trust: Candidates must weigh the importance of patient safety and the hospital’s reputation against maintaining trust and a harmonious work environment.
  2. Communication: Candidates must effectively communicate their advice to the upset nurse while being sensitive to their emotions and concerns.
  3. Ethical Decision-Making: Candidates must articulate a well-reasoned response that takes into account both the ethical obligations and the potential consequences of their advice.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might suggest reporting the incident directly without much consideration for the interpersonal dynamics involved. They may fail to acknowledge the potential impact on working relationships and could overlook the need for a delicate approach.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would follow these steps:

  1. Active Listening and Empathy: They would begin by actively listening to the upset nurse, acknowledging their feelings and concerns. This helps establish rapport and shows empathy.
  2. Exploration of Options: They would discuss the pros and cons of both reporting and confronting the nurse, considering patient safety, legal obligations, and maintaining a supportive work environment.
  3. Suggesting a Balanced Approach: They would propose a balanced approach, such as suggesting the upset nurse privately talk to the nurse involved, express their concerns, and offer support. If the behaviour continues, they would recommend involving a supervisor or manager.
  4. Emphasising Patient Safety: They would stress the importance of patient safety as a top priority and explain how addressing the issue can ensure the best care for patients.
  5. Communication Strategy: They would provide guidance on how to have the conversation with the nurse in question, emphasising the need for understanding and a non-confrontational tone.

An excellent candidate would display a nuanced understanding of ethical considerations, strong interpersonal skills, effective communication, and a compassionate approach to resolving the dilemma.

MMI Practice Station: “The Research Conundrum”

Station Setup:
You enter a room to find two actors playing the roles of researchers. One researcher is frustrated because their colleague is not contributing adequately to a joint research project. They feel burdened with most of the work. The other researcher explains they’ve been struggling with personal issues affecting their focus. You have 7 minutes to facilitate a conversation between the two researchers to find a resolution.

Question Stem:
“Thank you for joining me. We’ve hit a roadblock in our research collaboration. I feel like I’m doing most of the work, and it’s becoming overwhelming. My colleague here claims he has been dealing with personal issues stopping him from working. How can we move forward and ensure weā€™re both putting in the same amount of effort?”

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ability to mediate a professional dispute, foster teamwork, and find solutions in a collaborative environment. It evaluates the candidate’s communication skills, problem-solving abilities, and understanding of interpersonal dynamics.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Conflict Resolution: Candidates need to mediate a tense situation and address the grievances of both researchers while maintaining a constructive atmosphere.
  2. Effective Communication: Candidates must facilitate a productive conversation, ensuring both researchers have an opportunity to express their concerns and perspectives.
  3. Problem-Solving: Candidates should guide the researchers toward a solution that considers the personal challenges of one researcher while addressing the workload balance.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might suggest dividing the tasks equally and expect the researchers to resolve their issues independently. They may overlook the emotional aspects of the situation and fail to provide a comprehensive solution.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the scenario with the following steps:

  1. Active Listening and Validation: They would begin by allowing each researcher to express their feelings and concerns without interruption. This demonstrates empathy and creates an environment of trust.
  2. Clarification and Understanding: They would summarise each researcher’s perspective to ensure mutual understanding and avoid any miscommunication.
  3. Acknowledgment of Personal Challenges: They would express empathy toward the researcher facing personal challenges, acknowledging the impact on their work performance.
  4. Collaborative Problem-Solving: They would propose a joint solution, such as temporarily redistributing tasks based on the strengths and expertise of each researcher. This could involve providing additional support to the researcher facing personal challenges.
  5. Setting Expectations: They would suggest regular check-ins to monitor progress and ensure open communication, allowing adjustments to be made as needed.
  6. Encouraging Empathy and Support: They would emphasise the importance of supporting each other during challenging times and fostering a collaborative atmosphere that extends beyond the current project.
  7. Conflict Resolution Skills: They would provide guidance on how to approach disagreements constructively, ensuring that conflicts are resolved professionally and without escalation.
  8. Conclusion: They would summarise the agreed-upon action plan, highlighting the shared commitment to the project’s success and the well-being of both researchers.

An excellent candidate would exhibit exceptional interpersonal skills, a deep understanding of conflict resolution, the ability to guide a productive conversation and a thoughtful approach to finding solutions that consider both professional and personal factors.

MMI Practice Station: ā€œTreatment Effectā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room with a table containing cholesterol values before and after treatment for four different patients, a calculator, and a reference range for cholesterol levels. The interviewer explains that you are a medical student responsible for calculating the percentage difference in cholesterol levels for each patient after treatment and interpreting the impact of the new medication. You have 7 minutes to review the table, perform the calculations, and interpret the implications of the treatment.

Question Stem:
“Welcome to the calculation and data interpretation station. You are presented with cholesterol values before and after treatment for four different patients. Your task is to calculate the percentage difference in cholesterol levels for each patient after treatment and interpret the implications of the treatment. Please review the information provided and perform the necessary calculations.”

Patient Cholesterol Data:

PatientBefore Treatment (mg/dL)After Treatment (mg/dL)
A250200
B300240
C180190
D220210

Reference Range for Cholesterol Levels: Normal Cholesterol Below 200 mg/dL

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ability to calculate percentage differences, interpret changes in laboratory values, and understand the implications of treatment on patient health. The station evaluates the candidate’s numeracy skills, critical thinking, and capacity to apply knowledge in a healthcare context.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Percentage Calculation: Candidates must accurately calculate the percentage difference in cholesterol levels before and after treatment for each patient.
  2. Interpreting Impact: Candidates need to understand the significance of the calculated percentage differences and how they relate to the reference range and patient health.
  3. Critical Thinking: Candidates should consider the effectiveness of the new medication and the potential implications for patients’ cardiovascular health.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might struggle to accurately calculate the percentage differences or may not fully understand the implications of the changes in cholesterol levels for each patient.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the scenario with these steps:

  1. Percentage Calculation: They would accurately calculate the percentage difference in cholesterol levels for each patient by using the formula: ((Before – After) / Before) x 100.
  2. Reference Range Analysis: They would compare the post-treatment cholesterol levels to the reference range, noting which patients’ levels are now within the normal range.
  3. Interpreting Impact: They might discuss how the calculated percentage differences reflect the reduction in cholesterol levels after treatment and consider potential benefits for cardiovascular health.
  4. Effectiveness of Treatment: They might discuss the medication’s effectiveness in reducing cholesterol levels based on the calculated changes.
  5. Individual Patient Responses: They would analyse how each patient responded to treatment, considering factors such as their initial cholesterol levels and treatment compliance.
  6. Potential Further Steps: They might suggest additional lifestyle modifications or interventions that could complement the treatment and enhance patients’ overall health.

An excellent candidate would demonstrate exceptional numeracy skills, critical thinking, data interpretation abilities, and the capacity to apply knowledge to real-world healthcare scenarios involving cholesterol level changes and patient care.

MMI Practice Station: “The Patient’s Beliefsā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room to find an actor playing the role of a patient’s family member. They are upset because the medical team is not respecting their cultural beliefs while treating their loved one. The patient is in critical condition, and the family feels their traditional healing methods are essential. You have 7 minutes to address the family member’s concerns and discuss a way forward.

Question Stem:
“Thank you for coming in. I get that the doctors are working hard to help our loved one, but I can’t help feeling worried about our cultural beliefs not being considered. We strongly believe in our traditions, and it’s important to us. How can we make sure our family’s traditions are respected while also getting the best medical care?”

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ability to navigate cultural sensitivity in a medical context, communicate effectively with patients and their families, and find a balance between medical best practices and cultural considerations. It doesn’t require specific medical knowledge but evaluates the candidate’s cultural awareness, empathy, and communication skills.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Cultural Competence: Candidates must demonstrate an understanding of cultural diversity and the importance of incorporating patients’ cultural beliefs into their care.
  2. Effective Communication: Candidates need to establish rapport with the upset family member, effectively address their concerns, and convey the medical team’s commitment to the patient’s well-being.
  3. Ethical Dilemma: Candidates should consider the balance between adhering to evidence-based medical practices and respecting cultural beliefs.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might offer a general reassurance that the medical team is doing their best or might suggest following only evidence-based medical treatments, potentially dismissing the family’s concerns about cultural practices.

Practice MMI Interview Questions Pixel Image

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the scenario with these steps:

  1. Active Listening and Empathy: They would start by actively listening to the family member’s concerns, expressing empathy for their situation, and acknowledging the importance of their cultural beliefs.
  2. Validating Cultural Beliefs: They would validate the family’s cultural practices and beliefs, emphasising the significance of holistic care that respects both medical science and cultural traditions.
  3. Open Dialogue: They would foster an open dialogue, inviting the family member to share specific cultural practices they believe are crucial for the patient’s well-being.
  4. Exploring Options: They would discuss the possibility of integrating certain cultural practices that are safe and do not conflict with evidence-based medical treatments. They would explain any limitations based on medical necessity.
  5. Collaboration with Medical Team: They would assure the family that they would work closely with the medical team to find a balanced approach that respects both the family’s wishes and the patient’s medical needs.
  6. Ethical Justification: They would highlight the ethical principle of patient autonomy and the importance of shared decision-making, where medical expertise and cultural values converge.

An excellent candidate would showcase exceptional cultural sensitivity, effective communication skills, the ability to navigate complex ethical situations, and a commitment to patient-centred care that encompasses both medical expertise and cultural respect.

MMI Practice Station: ā€œInterpreting Research Findingsā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room with three other candidates. The interviewer explains that you will participate in a group task simulating a Problem-Based Learning (PBL) environment. Each candidate will play a specific role. You are provided with a research study abstract and tasked with collaborating to analyse the findings, identify key implications, and discuss potential applications of the research. You have 10 minutes to work together and present your group’s understanding and insights.

Question Stem:
“Imagine you are a group of individuals participating in a PBL discussion about a research study on the effects of exercise on mental health. The study abstract presents findings related to the impact of regular physical activity on reducing stress and improving mood. The discussion should explore the significance of the research, potential limitations, and its relevance to healthcare practices.”

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ability to collaborate, critically analyse research findings, apply critical thinking, and propose applications in a PBL-style group task. The station evaluates the candidate’s teamwork, problem-solving, and leadership skills within a medical education context without requiring specific medical knowledge.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Collaboration: Candidates must effectively collaborate with peers, respecting each role and contributing their expertise to the discussion.
  2. Research Interpretation: Candidates need to accurately interpret the research study abstract, considering key findings and implications.
  3. Critical Thinking: Candidates should critically analyse the research’s strengths, limitations, and potential applications in healthcare practices.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might participate in the discussion but may struggle to fully understand the research findings or provide in-depth insights into implications and applications.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the scenario with these steps:

  1. Active Listening: They would actively listen to their peers’ contributions and integrate their ideas into the discussion.
  2. Contributing Expertise: They would contribute their expertise according to the group’s discussion focus. For instance, they might offer insights into research interpretation, implications, or healthcare applications.
  3. Facilitating Discussion: They might facilitate the discussion by summarising key points, clarifying misunderstandings, and ensuring that all aspects of the research are addressed.
  4. Research Analysis: They would analyse the research study’s abstract, highlighting key findings related to exercise’s impact on mental health, such as stress reduction and mood improvement.
  5. Implications and Applications: They would discuss the potential implications of the findings for mental health management and suggest ways in which healthcare providers could integrate exercise recommendations into patient care.
  6. Critical Assessment: They might identify potential limitations of the study, such as sample size or methodology, and discuss how these limitations might impact the research’s credibility and application.
  7. Synthesising Ideas: They would synthesise the group’s contributions, emphasising consensus points and exploring potential next steps for healthcare practice and future research.

An excellent candidate would demonstrate exceptional collaboration skills, effective communication, critical thinking, and the ability to work within a PBL-style group task. They would contribute insightful interpretations of research findings, consider implications, and propose meaningful applications in healthcare practices.

MMI Practice Station: “The Discharge Planā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room to find an actor playing the role of a patient’s caregiver. The caregiver is frustrated because the medical team has provided unclear instructions for the patient’s discharge. They feel overwhelmed and unsure about how to manage the patient’s care at home. You have 7 minutes to assist the caregiver in understanding the discharge plan and addressing their concerns.

Question Stem:
“Thank you for coming in. I’ve been struggling to understand the discharge instructions for my dad. The information seems unclear and I’m worried about managing his care at home. Can you help me understand what I need to do and make sure my dad receives the right care after leaving the hospital?ā€

Discharge Summary:

Patient Name: John Davids
Hospital Number: 76612944
Diagnosis: Chest Infection

Treatment Plan:
John Davids was admitted with a chest infection and received appropriate medical care during his hospital stay. His condition has improved, and he is now ready for discharge. 

Discharge Instructions:

  1. Medication: John is prescribed a 7-day course of antibiotics to continue his treatment at home. Take one tablet by mouth every 12 hours. Start the antibiotics tomorrow morning and complete the full course.
  2. Follow-Up: An appointment has been scheduled for John to see his GP on August 27th for a follow-up evaluation.
  3. Activity: Engage in light physical activity, gradually increasing as you feel better. Avoid strenuous activities during the first few days of recovery.
  4. Emergency Contact: If you experience any worsening symptoms or have concerns, please contact our hospital’s emergency department or your GP.

Please follow these instructions carefully to ensure a smooth recovery at home. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to contact our hospital’s nursing helpline at (123) 456-7890.

Wishing you a speedy recovery,

Dr Ollie

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ability to communicate effectively with patients’ caregivers, demonstrate interprofessional collaboration, and provide clear and comprehensible medical instructions. It evaluates the candidate’s communication skills, patient advocacy, and teamwork abilities.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Effective Communication: Candidates must translate complex medical information into clear, understandable terms for the caregiver without oversimplifying or omitting critical details.
  2. Interprofessional Collaboration: Candidates need to address the caregiver’s concerns while acknowledging the role of various healthcare professionals in the patient’s care.
  3. Empathy and Patient-Centred Care: Candidates should demonstrate empathy and ensure the caregiver feels supported in managing the patient’s care at home.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might offer a quick rundown of the discharge instructions or recommend the caregiver look online for clarification. They might overlook the caregiver’s emotional state and the need for personalised guidance.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the scenario with these steps:

  1. Empathetic Engagement: They would start by expressing empathy for the caregiver’s situation, acknowledging their frustration and concerns.
  2. Active Listening: They would encourage the caregiver to share their specific questions and challenges regarding the discharge plan, actively listening to their needs.
  3. Clear Explanations: They would provide clear explanations of the discharge instructions, using plain language, visual aids, and analogies where applicable to ensure understanding.
  4. Question-Driven Approach: They would encourage the caregiver to ask questions, ensuring all concerns are addressed and clarifying any lingering doubts.
  5. Summarisation: They would summarise the key points of the conversation, ensuring the caregiver feels empowered and well-equipped to manage the patient’s care at home.

An excellent candidate would display exceptional communication skills, patient-centred care and a commitment to providing comprehensive support to patients and their caregivers during the transition from hospital to home care.

Students taking part in a mock MMI circuit
Students taking part in a practice MMI circuit

MMI Practice Station: “The Clinical Trial Conundrumā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room where the interviewer, acting as a medical researcher, welcomes you. The interviewer explains that you are a researcher involved in a clinical trial for a new medication. The trial has reached a crucial stage, but participants have started experiencing unexpected and severe side effects. The researcher expresses concern over potentially harming participants and asks for your input on whether to continue the trial. You have 7 minutes to discuss the situation with the researcher.

Question Stem:
“We’ve reached a critical point, but some participants are experiencing severe and unexpected side effects. I’m concerned about their well-being. Should we continue the trial as planned, potentially risking more participants’ health, or should we halt the trial to investigate these side effects? What are your thoughts? 

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ethical reasoning, ability to engage in thoughtful decision-making and communication skills. The station requires the candidate to grapple with some of the ethical complexities of medical research.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Ethical Considerations: Candidates must weigh the potential benefits of the trial against the risks posed by unexpected side effects while considering the well-being of participants.
  2. Balancing Interests: Candidates need to balance the pursuit of medical advancement and knowledge with their responsibility to protect the health and safety of trial participants.
  3. Effective Communication: Candidates should convey their stance clearly and logically, considering the various factors involved.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might express a simplistic view, leaning towards continuing the trial for the sake of progress or immediately stopping the trial, without thoroughly considering the situation or addressing the researcher’s concerns.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the scenario with these steps:

  1. Understanding the Issue: They would ask clarifying questions about the severity and nature of the side effects, seeking a comprehensive understanding of the situation.   
  2. Balanced Approach: They would acknowledge the value of medical research and its potential benefits for patients in need, while also acknowledging the researcher’s concerns about participant safety. 
  3. Ethical Considerations: They would emphasise the importance of upholding ethical principles, such as beneficence (doing good) and non-maleficence (doing no harm), in medical research.
  4. Risk Assessment: They would discuss the necessity of investigating the side effects further to understand their cause and potential implications for participants.
  5. Temporary Halt: They might recommend temporarily halting the trial to investigate the side effects thoroughly before making an informed decision about proceeding.
  6. Transparency: They would highlight the importance of transparent communication with participants, ensuring they are aware of the situation and potential risks.
  7. Collaborative Decision: They would suggest involving an ethics committee or a panel of experts to review the situation and collectively decide on the best course of action.

An excellent candidate would showcase a nuanced understanding of ethical considerations, critical thinking, clear communication, and a patient-centred approach that values both medical progress and participant well-being.

MMI Practice Station: ā€œThe Flu Outbreakā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room where the interviewer presents you with a written scenario. The scenario describes a hypothetical public health crisis in a community. The interviewer explains that you are part of a task force responsible for addressing the crisis. You are given the scenario and are asked to provide your thoughts on possible strategies to manage the situation effectively. You have 7 minutes to read the scenario and outline your proposed strategies.

Question Stem:
“In a small town, there has been a sudden outbreak of a contagious illness with flu-like symptoms. The town’s medical facilities are overwhelmed, and there is a shortage of medical personnel and supplies. The illness is spreading rapidly, and there is widespread panic in the community. How would you propose managing this public health crisis to contain the outbreak and address the community’s concerns?”

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and ability to devise practical strategies in a challenging situation. The station evaluates the candidate’s analytical thinking, creativity, and consideration of broader community factors.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Critical Analysis: Candidates must quickly assess the scenario, identify key challenges, and consider the potential consequences of different strategies.
  2. Resource Allocation: Candidates should propose effective strategies considering the shortage of medical personnel and supplies.
  3. Community Communication: Candidates need to address community panic while ensuring accurate and timely information dissemination.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might suggest straightforward solutions like setting up temporary medical facilities or calling in outside medical assistance. They may not consider the psychological impact on the community or potential challenges in implementing their strategies.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the scenario with these steps:

  1. Assessment of Situation: They would first evaluate the severity of the outbreak, available resources, and the community’s specific needs.
  2. Immediate Measures: They would propose immediate actions like establishing a central command centre to coordinate efforts, prioritising treatment for severe cases, and ensuring proper infection control measures.
  3. Resource Allocation: They would suggest creative solutions to address the shortage of medical personnel and supplies, such as recruiting medical students or retired healthcare professionals, and coordinating with neighbouring towns for additional resources.
  4. Community Engagement: They would emphasise the importance of clear and transparent communication with the community, sharing accurate information about the illness, prevention measures, and available healthcare services.
  5. Addressing Panic: They would propose community-wide educational campaigns to address panic, dispel misinformation, and provide psychological support to affected individuals.   
  6. Isolation and Quarantine: They might recommend identifying and isolating potential cases, as well as imposing quarantine measures, to prevent further spread.
  7. Data Collection: They would suggest collecting and analysing data to track the outbreak’s progression, identify trends, and make informed decisions.

An excellent candidate would display exceptional critical thinking, strategic planning, consideration of community dynamics, and a proactive approach to managing a public health crisis while addressing both immediate and long-term concerns.

MMI Practice Station: ā€œRecent Healthcare Newsā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room where an examiner is seated. The examiner explains that you will have five minutes to discuss a recent healthcare topic you’ve read about in the news. Your task is to analyse the topic, consider its implications for healthcare in the future, and engage in a thoughtful discussion. The examiner will ask follow-up questions to further explore your insights.

Question Stem:
“Welcome to the discussion station. Please take five minutes to discuss a recent healthcare topic you’ve read about in the news. Consider the implications this topic could have for healthcare in the future. Engage in a thoughtful discussion, and be prepared for follow-up questions from me. We’re interested in your ability to analyse and communicate your understanding.”

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station evaluates the candidate’s ability to stay informed about current healthcare issues, analyse their implications, and communicate their insights effectively. It assesses the candidate’s awareness of the evolving healthcare landscape and their capacity to engage in informed discussions.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Current Awareness: Candidates must be up-to-date on recent healthcare news to have a relevant topic for discussion.
  2. Critical Thinking: Candidates need to analyse the topic’s implications beyond its immediate context and consider how it might shape healthcare in the future.
  3. Effective Communication: Candidates should convey their thoughts clearly, express insights, and engage in a coherent discussion.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might discuss a recent healthcare news item, describing its basic details and mentioning its potential benefits or concerns. However, their discussion might lack depth, critical analysis, or broader implications for the healthcare field.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the discussion with these steps:

  1. Selecting a Relevant Topic: They would introduce the chosen healthcare news topic, highlighting its relevance and potential impact.
  2. Detailed Analysis: They would provide an in-depth analysis of the topic’s implications, considering how it might shape healthcare practices, policies, and patient outcomes in the future.
  3. Identifying Stakeholders: They might discuss the various stakeholders involved, such as healthcare providers, patients, policymakers, and technology developers, and how they could be affected.
  4. Contextualising the Issue: They could place the topic within a broader context, discussing its alignment with ongoing healthcare trends, challenges, and priorities.
  5. Balanced Perspective: They would present a balanced perspective, discussing potential benefits and risks associated with the topic’s implementation.
  6. Innovative Insights: They might offer innovative insights into potential applications or adaptations of the topic, envisioning how it could drive positive changes in healthcare.
  7. Global Implications: They could discuss how the topic’s implications extend beyond their local context and might have broader implications for healthcare globally.
  8. Effective Communication: They would communicate their thoughts coherently, maintain eye contact, and engage in a dynamic and insightful discussion.
  9. Addressing Follow-Up Questions: They would handle follow-up questions confidently, expanding on their initial insights and adapting to new angles of discussion.

An excellent candidate would demonstrate a deep understanding of the chosen healthcare topic, the ability to critically analyse its implications, and effective communication skills. They would engage in a thought-provoking discussion, showcasing their capacity to consider the long-term impact of current healthcare developments.

MMI Practice Station: ā€œVillages In Needā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room with a table holding various resources, including water bottles, blankets, food packets, and communication devices. The interviewer explains that you are part of a disaster response team responsible for distributing resources among three different villages affected by a disaster. Each village has unique characteristics. You are provided with descriptions of the villages and must allocate resources accordingly. You have 7 minutes to review the village descriptions and prioritise resource allocation.

Question Stem:
“Welcome to the disaster response simulation. As a member of the team, you need to allocate limited resources to three different villages affected by a disaster. Please review the village descriptions and decide how to distribute the resources based on their specific needs.”

Village Descriptions:

Village A:

  • Location: Located near a stream, so water supply is accessible.
  • Food: Limited food supplies, as the village relies heavily on farming.
  • Shelter: Adequate shelter available for most residents.
  • Communication: Poor communication infrastructure, making coordination difficult.
  • Urgent Need: Requires food supplies, blankets, and communication devices.

Village B:

  • Location: Remote and isolated, with no nearby water source.
  • Food: Abundance of food due to a well-stocked granary.
  • Shelter: Basic shelters available, but some were damaged during the disaster.
  • Communication: Limited communication devices available.
  • Urgent Need: Requires water, shelter repair materials, and communication devices.

Village C:

  • Location: Coastal village with easy access to water, but water may be contaminated.
  • Food: Limited food supplies due to fishing being the main source of food, disrupted by the disaster.
  • Shelter: Majority of shelters damaged or destroyed.
  • Communication: Good communication infrastructure available.
  • Urgent Need: Requires food supplies, shelter materials, clean water, and communication devices.

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ability to analyse different scenarios, consider diverse needs, and make informed decisions about resource allocation based on varying village characteristics.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Multi-Faceted Prioritisation: Candidates must prioritise resources based on the varying needs of the three distinct villages.
  2. Critical Thinking: Candidates need to think creatively to match resources to each village’s situation and maximise their effectiveness.
  3. Strategic Allocation: Candidates should consider the immediate needs of each village, potential long-term consequences, and the most efficient use of resources.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might allocate resources based on a superficial analysis, not fully considering the unique situations of each village or the long-term implications of their choices.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the scenario with these steps:

  1. Village Analysis: They would thoroughly read and understand the descriptions of each village, identifying the specific challenges and resources available in each case.
  2. Resource Evaluation: They would assess the available resources on the table, considering their relevance to the unique needs of each village.
  3. Prioritisation Strategy: They would develop a strategic approach that allocates resources to address immediate needs while also considering the long-term impact.
  4. Village-Specific Allocation: They would allocate resources to Village A to address food and communication needs, to Village B for water and shelter repair, and to Village C for food, shelter, clean water, and communication devices.
  5. Sustainability: They would consider the sustainability of their decisions, allocating resources that support long-term recovery and rebuilding efforts.
  6. Equity: They would distribute resources equitably among the villages, considering the principle of fairness and avoiding overallocation to one village at the expense of others.
  7. Communication and Coordination: They would propose a plan for coordinating resource distribution, especially in villages with poor communication infrastructure.
  8. Ethical Considerations: They would discuss the ethical dimensions of their decisions, considering the well-being of each village’s residents and the importance of minimising harm.

An excellent candidate would demonstrate exceptional critical thinking, strategic decision-making, consideration of diverse needs, and the ability to allocate resources effectively to maximise their impact on different communities facing a disaster.

A student in the middle of a medicine MMI station
A student midway through an MMI station

MMI Practice Station: ā€œThe Construction Challengeā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room to find a table with a variety of building materials (such as wooden blocks, strings, and small objects) and a sheet of paper with a diagram of a structure. The interviewer explains that you are part of a construction challenge. Your task is to guide your partner (played by the interviewer) in building the structure using the materials provided. You are not allowed to show the diagram to your partner. You have 7 minutes to give instructions verbally and guide your partner in constructing the object.

Question Stem:
“Welcome to the construction challenge. Your goal is to describe and guide your partner (played by me) in building a specific structure using the materials on the table. You have a diagram with the structure’s design, but you cannot show it to your partner. Please review the diagram and begin giving instructions to your partner.”

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ability to convey detailed information effectively, use verbal communication to guide a task, adapt instructions based on feedback, and collaborate in a non-medical context. It evaluates the candidate’s communication skills, clarity, adaptability, and problem-solving abilities.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Clear Instructions: Candidates must describe the structure’s design and guide their partner in constructing it using precise verbal instructions.
  2. Adaptability: Candidates need to adjust their communication style and instructions based on their partner’s progress and feedback.
  3. Problem-Solving: Candidates should troubleshoot any misunderstandings or errors in construction without visual cues.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might struggle to provide clear instructions, leading to confusion or misinterpretation by their partner. They may become frustrated if the construction doesn’t proceed as intended.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the challenge with these steps:

  1. Introduction: They would start by describing the overall goal of the structure and its key components, setting the context for the construction.
  2. Segmented Steps: They would break down the construction process into small, manageable steps, ensuring each step is explained thoroughly before proceeding.
  3. Verbal Cues: They might use verbal cues like “left,” “right,” “on top,” and “underneath” to provide spatial orientation.
  4. Progress Checkpoints: They would periodically ask their partner to describe what they have constructed so far, confirming understanding and addressing any potential mistakes.
  5. Positive Reinforcement: They might use positive affirmations to encourage their partner and create a supportive atmosphere.
  6. Adaptation: They would adjust their instructions based on their partner’s feedback and progress, ensuring they were on the right track.
  7. Clarifications: They would encourage their partner to ask questions if anything is unclear, providing immediate clarification.
  8. Patience and Flexibility: They would maintain patience and adapt their communication if challenges arise, addressing any issues calmly and creatively.

An excellent candidate would exhibit exceptional communication skills, adaptability, patience, problem-solving abilities, and effective collaboration in guiding their partner through a task with verbal instructions.

MMI Practice Station: ā€œAddressing Unprofessional Behaviourā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room where the interviewer presents you with a written scenario. The scenario describes a medical training setting where you are a medical student. You witness a fellow medical student arriving for a clinical placement visibly still intoxicated from a night out the previous night. The situation raises concerns about patient safety, professionalism, and ethical behaviour. You are tasked with deciding how to handle the situation. You have 7 minutes to read the scenario and outline your approach.

Question Stem:
“As a medical student on a clinical placement, you arrive at the hospital to find a fellow student who appears to be intoxicated from a night out. Their behaviour raises significant concerns about their ability to provide safe patient care, maintain professionalism, and uphold ethical standards. As a medical student, how would you address this situation while considering patient safety, your ethical responsibility, and maintaining a supportive learning environment?”

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ability to exercise professional judgment, ethical reasoning, and decision-making in a medical training setting. The station evaluates the candidate’s understanding of ethical principles, communication skills, and capacity to navigate complex professional challenges specific to healthcare.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Balancing Priorities: Candidates must navigate the tension between patient safety, their own ethical responsibility, and the well-being of the other medical student.
  2. Ethical and Professional Dilemma: Candidates need to consider the potential consequences of addressing the situation and the impact on their fellow student’s professional development.
  3. Effective Communication: Candidates should anticipate how they would communicate their concerns, not only to their fellow student but also to relevant people within the medical program.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might feel hesitant about confronting the student, fearing that it could damage their relationship or lead to unnecessary conflict. They might not fully consider the potential harm to patient safety and the broader implications of the fellow student’s behaviour.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the scenario with these steps:

  1. Immediately Address Patient Safety: They would prioritise patient safety and consider whether the fellow student is in a condition to provide safe and effective patient care.
  2. Observation and Confirmation: They might gather more information discreetly to ensure their observations are accurate and that the fellow student is indeed intoxicated.
  3. Ethical Principles: They would discuss the fundamental ethical principles of patient safety, professionalism, and accountability in medical practice, highlighting their importance in maintaining the integrity of healthcare.
  4. Supportive Approach: They would consider a non-confrontational approach, seeking to understand the circumstances that led to the fellow student’s behaviour before expressing their concerns.
  5. Confidentiality: They would commit to handling the situation discreetly, protecting the student’s privacy while addressing the larger ethical concern.
  6. Seeking Guidance: They might propose discussing the situation with a faculty mentor or a designated person responsible for student welfare to seek guidance on how best to address the issue.
  7. Conversation with Fellow Student: They would encourage open communication with the student, expressing their observations, and discussing the potential impact on patient care and the broader medical community.

An excellent candidate would demonstrate exceptional ethical reasoning, professionalism, effective communication skills, and the ability to address a sensitive ethical dilemma in a medical training setting while considering patient well-being, professional development, and maintaining a positive learning environment.

MMI Practice Station: ā€œIntravenous Medication Dosesā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room with a table containing a patient’s medical chart, a calculator, and three medication vials with different strengths. The interviewer explains that you are a junior doctor responsible for calculating the correct volume of each medication to be administered intravenously based on the patient’s weight and the prescribed dose. You have 5 minutes to review the patient’s chart, calculate the required volumes for each medication, and interpret the implications of the dosages.

Question Stem:
“Welcome to the calculation station. You are presented with a patient’s medical chart, three medication vials of different strengths, and the required doses for each medication. Your task is to calculate the appropriate volume of each medication to be administered intravenously based on the patient’s weight. Please review the information provided and perform the calculations.”

Patient’s Medical Chart:

– Patient’s Weight: 60 kg

Medication Information:

Medication A:
– Medication Strength: 20 mg/mL
– Required Dose: 0.5 mg/kg

Medication B:
– Medication Strength: 10 mg/mL
– Required Dose: 0.2 mg/kg

Medication C:
– Medication Strength: 5 mg/mL
– Required Dose: 0.1 mg/kg

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ability to perform medication dosage calculations for intravenous administration and understand the implications of dosages based on varying medication strengths. The station evaluates the candidate’s numeracy skills, critical thinking, and capacity to apply knowledge in a healthcare context.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Calculating Volume: Candidates must accurately calculate the volume of each medication based on the patient’s weight and the required dose per kg.
  2. Interpreting Dosages: Candidates need to understand the implications of the medication dosages and how they relate to the patient’s weight and the strengths of the medications.
  3. Critical Thinking: Candidates should consider the suitability of each medication’s strength and the volume required for intravenous administration.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might struggle with performing accurate volume calculations for each medication or might not fully interpret the significance of the dosages in relation to the patient’s weight.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the scenario with these steps:

  1. Dosage Calculation: They would accurately calculate the required dose for each medication based on the patient’s weight (60 kg). For example, they would calculate the required dose of Medication A as 0.5 mg/kg x 60 kg. 
  2. Volume Calculation: They would calculate the volume of each medication required using the medication strengths and the calculated doses. For instance, they would calculate the volume of Medication A as (required dose/medication strength) = volume (mL). 
  3. Medication Implications: They might discuss how each medication’s dosage relates to the patient’s weight and the strengths of the medications.
  4. Comparing Volumes: They would compare the calculated volumes for each medication and discuss the feasibility of administering the required doses intravenously.
  5. Administration Considerations: They would discuss the importance of accurately measuring and administering intravenous medications to ensure patient safety and effectiveness.
  6. Patient Safety: They might address the importance of double-checking calculations and adhering to protocols to prevent medication errors.

An excellent candidate would demonstrate exceptional numeracy skills, critical thinking, data interpretation abilities, and the capacity to apply knowledge to real-world healthcare scenarios involving intravenous medication dosages and patient care.

MMI Practice Station: ā€œTreatment Disagreementsā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room with three other candidates. The interviewer explains that you will participate in a group task simulating a Problem-Based Learning (PBL) environment. The task involves a discussion about why doctors and patients sometimes disagree on treatment options. An examiner will observe the discussion. You are provided with a scenario and are expected to collaborate with the group to analyse the situation, identify reasons for disagreement, and propose strategies to address such disagreements. You have 10 minutes to work together, and the examiner will observe the discussion.

Question Stem:
“Welcome to the group task station in a PBL environment. Your task is to engage in a discussion with your fellow candidates about why doctors and patients might sometimes disagree on treatment options. You should collaboratively identify reasons for these disagreements and propose strategies to address them. An examiner will observe your discussion. Please review the information provided, collaborate effectively, and engage in the discussion within the given time.”

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ability to collaborate, communicate effectively, analyse a scenario, apply critical thinking, and propose strategies in a PBL-style group discussion. The station evaluates the candidate’s teamwork, problem-solving, and communication skills within a medical education context.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Collaboration: Candidates must effectively collaborate with peers, share insights, and contribute constructively to the discussion.
  2. Critical Thinking: Candidates need to analyse the scenario, identify potential reasons for disagreements, and formulate thoughtful strategies.
  3. Effective Communication: Candidates should actively listen, express their ideas clearly, and ensure that the discussion remains focused and productive.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might contribute to the discussion but might struggle to fully engage, offer deeper insights, or provide well-structured strategies to address disagreements.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the scenario with these steps:

  1. Engaging Discussion: They would actively participate in the discussion, listening to peers and contributing their perspectives.
  2. Deep Analysis: They would analyse potential reasons for disagreements between doctors and patients, considering factors such as medical knowledge, patient preferences, communication barriers, cultural differences, and ethical considerations.
  3. Comprehensive Strategies: They would propose well-thought-out strategies to address disagreements, such as fostering open communication, practising shared decision-making, enhancing patient education, and cultivating empathy on both sides.
  4. Addressing Challenges: They might discuss potential challenges in implementing strategies and suggest approaches to overcome these challenges.
  5. Balanced Discussion: They would ensure that all perspectives are considered, encouraging others to share their insights and collaborating to reach a well-rounded conclusion.
  6. Ethical Considerations: They might highlight the importance of respecting patient autonomy and promoting patient-centred care while maintaining the best interests of the patient’s health.
  7. Synthesising Ideas: They would synthesise the group’s contributions, highlighting key insights, agreements, and potential action steps.

An excellent candidate would demonstrate exceptional collaboration skills, effective communication, critical thinking, and the ability to engage in a dynamic group discussion while considering various perspectives and contributing to a well-rounded exploration of the topic.

MMI Practice Station: ā€œVentilator Allocationā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room where the interviewer presents you with a written scenario. The scenario describes a hypothetical situation in a hospital during a severe flu outbreak. There is a shortage of life-saving ventilators, and the medical team must decide which patients will receive them. You are asked to provide your perspective on how the ventilators should be allocated. You have 7 minutes to read the scenario and outline your proposed approach.

Question Stem:
“During a severe flu outbreak, your hospital faces a shortage of ventilators. Multiple patients require immediate use of ventilators to survive. The medical team must decide who receives the limited number of available ventilators. How would you propose allocating the ventilators in a fair and ethical manner?”

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ethical reasoning, empathy, and ability to make difficult decisions in a high-stakes scenario. The station evaluates the candidate’s ethical considerations, logical thinking, and moral judgment.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Ethical Dilemma: Candidates must navigate the challenging task of determining how to allocate limited resources in a life-threatening situation.
  2. Equity and Fairness: Candidates need to balance the principles of fairness and equity while considering the medical needs of individual patients.
  3. Moral and Ethical Justifications: Candidates should articulate their decision-making process based on ethical principles such as utilitarianism, distributive justice, and individual rights.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might propose a simplistic “first come, first served” approach or a random selection method. They may not thoroughly consider the ethical implications of their proposed method.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the scenario with these steps:

  1. Needs Assessment: They would first evaluate the severity of each patient’s condition, prognosis, and potential benefits from ventilator use.
  2. Ethical Principles: They would discuss the importance of ethical principles like maximising benefits (utilitarianism) and treating patients with equal concern and respect (distributive justice).
  3. Medical Triage: They would propose a triage system that prioritises patients based on their likelihood of survival and potential for recovery, ensuring the greatest overall benefit to the population.
  4. Medical Expertise: They might suggest forming a multi-disciplinary team to assess patients’ medical information and make informed decisions collectively.
  5. Transparency and Communication: They would emphasise the significance of open communication with patients’ families, explaining the decision-making process and the ethical considerations involved.
  6. Regular Reevaluation: They would propose a system for regular reassessment of patients’ conditions and ventilator allocation to adapt to changing medical circumstances.
  7. Moral Justification: They would provide a well-reasoned ethical justification for their proposed approach, referencing ethical principles and the medical profession’s commitment to patient well-being.

An excellent candidate would demonstrate a thoughtful and nuanced understanding of ethical considerations, logical reasoning, the ability to make difficult decisions while prioritising the greater good, and effective communication skills in discussing challenging topics.

A medicine applicant sits next to an actor in her MMI
Two friends preparing for an MMI interview together

MMI Practice Station: ā€œYour Hobbiesā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room where an interviewer is seated. The interviewer explains that you will have two minutes to give a verbal presentation about one of your hobbies. A stopwatch is set up to track the time. The interviewer emphasises that they are interested in learning more about you beyond academics.

Question Stem:
“Welcome to the verbal presentation station. Please take two minutes to give a presentation about one of your hobbies. This is an opportunity for us to learn more about your interests and personality. You have four minutes to prepare and may begin your presentation when you’re ready.”

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ability to communicate effectively, express themselves, and provide insight into their interests and personality. It allows the admissions committee to understand the candidate beyond their academic achievements and explore their passion and communication skills.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Time Management: Candidates must convey relevant information about their hobby within a limited two-minute time frame.
  2. Effective Communication: Candidates should present their hobby coherently, engaging the interviewer while avoiding excessive details or rambling.
  3. Showcasing Passion: Candidates need to convey enthusiasm and passion for their chosen hobby to create a memorable impression.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might provide a basic overview of their hobby, discussing what it is and their involvement in it. They might struggle to maintain a structured presentation, potentially speaking too quickly or failing to emphasise their enthusiasm.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the presentation with these steps:

  1. Engaging Introduction: They would begin with a captivating opening statement that introduces their hobby and piques the interviewer’s interest.
  2. Clear Structure: They would organise their presentation coherently, using a brief outline that covers key aspects of their hobby.
  3. Passionate Description: They would communicate their passion for the hobby through vivid descriptions and personal anecdotes, demonstrating their deep connection to it.
  4. Relevance to Personal Growth: They might discuss how the hobby has impacted their personal growth, skills, and mindset, showcasing the holistic benefits.
  5. Engaging the Interviewer: They would maintain eye contact with the interviewer, conveying genuine excitement and encouraging them to feel involved.
  6. Conclusion: They would wrap up the presentation by summarising key points, reiterating their passion, and expressing the role the hobby plays in their life.
  7. Confidence: They would speak confidently and at a moderate pace, ensuring that their enthusiasm shines through while respecting the time limit.

An excellent candidate would effectively communicate their hobby, showcasing their personality, passion, and presentation skills. Their presentation would leave a memorable and positive impression on the interviewer, contributing to a well-rounded evaluation of their candidacy.

MMI Practice Station: ā€œThe Effects Of Exerciseā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room where an examiner is seated. On the table, there’s a short extract from a scientific study along with paper and pen. The examiner explains that you will have three minutes to read the extract and then describe to them the conclusions that can be drawn from it. The examiner emphasises that they are interested in your ability to critically analyse research findings.

Question Stem:
“Welcome to the scientific study analysis station. You will have three minutes to read the provided extract from a scientific study and then explain to me the conclusions that can be drawn from it. This is an opportunity to showcase your ability to understand and interpret research findings. Please take your time to read the extract before beginning your explanation.ā€

Scientific Study Extract:

Title: The Effects of Exercise on Cognitive Function in Older Adults

Abstract: This study aimed to investigate the potential cognitive benefits of regular exercise in older adults. A total of 150 participants aged 60 to 75 were recruited and divided into two groups: an exercise group and a control group. The exercise group engaged in supervised aerobic exercise sessions three times a week for six months, while the control group did not change their activity levels.

Cognitive function was assessed using standardised neuropsychological tests at baseline and post-intervention.

The results indicated a significant improvement in cognitive function among participants in the exercise group. Specifically, they demonstrated enhanced performance in memory tasks, attention span, and executive function. In contrast, the control group showed no significant changes in cognitive function.

Furthermore, neuroimaging data revealed increased connectivity in brain regions associated with memory and attention in the exercise group. This suggests that regular exercise might have a positive impact on neural plasticity and cognitive reserve in older adults.

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ability to read, comprehend, and critically analyse scientific research findings. It tests their capacity to extract relevant information, identify key conclusions, and effectively communicate their understanding to others.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Comprehension: Candidates must quickly grasp the content and context of the scientific study extract within a limited time frame.
  2. Critical Analysis: Candidates need to identify the main findings and conclusions of the study, considering its implications and limitations.
  3. Effective Communication: Candidates should convey their understanding of the research findings clearly and concisely to the examiner.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might read the extract and then provide a brief summary of the content. They may struggle to identify the main conclusions of the study, possibly overlooking important details or nuances.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the task with these steps:

  1. Reading and Comprehension: They would read the extract carefully, ensuring they understand the context, objectives, and methodology of the study.
  2. Identification of Key Findings: They would extract the main findings and conclusions of the study, noting any significant trends, correlations, or outcomes.
  3. Implications: They would discuss the implications of the research findings, considering how they contribute to existing knowledge or address a specific research question.
  4. Interpretation: They might provide their interpretation of the conclusions, discussing potential real-world applications or insights that the study provides.
  5. Consideration of Limitations: They would acknowledge any limitations of the study that may affect the validity of the conclusions.
  6. Clarity and Structure: They would structure their response coherently, ensuring that their description flows logically and concisely.
  7. Engagement with the Examiner: They would maintain eye contact and use confident and articulate language to effectively communicate their understanding.
  8. Reflection: They might conclude by reflecting on the broader significance of the study and how it contributes to the field of research.

An excellent candidate would demonstrate their ability to critically analyse research findings, extract key conclusions, and effectively communicate their understanding. Their response would reflect their capacity to think analytically, synthesise information, and draw meaningful insights from scientific literature.

MMI Practice Station: ā€œCurrent NHS Challengesā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room where an examiner is seated. The examiner explains that you will engage in a discussion about the current challenges facing the NHS. The aim is to explore your awareness of healthcare issues and your ability to critically analyse and discuss complex topics. The discussion will last for about five minutes.

Question Stem:
“Welcome to the discussion station. We would like to hear your thoughts on the current challenges that the NHS is facing. Please share your perspective on the key issues and engage in a discussion with me. We’re interested in your ability to critically analyse and communicate your understanding.”

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s knowledge of healthcare systems, their ability to identify and discuss critical challenges, and their communication skills. It aims to gauge the candidate’s awareness of broader healthcare issues and their capacity to engage in informed and thoughtful discussions.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Informed Discussion: Candidates must be well-informed about the current challenges facing the NHS, including financial constraints, workforce shortages, increasing demand, and healthcare inequalities.
  2. Critical Thinking: Candidates need to critically analyse the challenges, consider their underlying causes, and potentially propose strategies for addressing them.
  3. Effective Communication: Candidates should convey their thoughts clearly, concisely, and confidently while engaging in a meaningful discussion.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might discuss one or two challenges facing the NHS, such as workforce shortages or funding constraints. However, their discussion might lack depth, analysis, or a comprehensive understanding of the broader issues.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the discussion with these steps:

  1. Identifying Multiple Challenges: They would discuss a range of challenges facing the NHS, including financial sustainability, workforce shortages, increasing demand, healthcare inequalities, and the impact of technological advancements.
  2. Critical Analysis: They would analyse the underlying causes of each challenge, considering factors such as budget constraints, an ageing population, recruitment difficulties, and socioeconomic disparities.
  3. Interconnections: They might explore how these challenges are interconnected, affecting one another and potentially exacerbating the overall situation.
  4. Potential Solutions: They could propose strategies to address these challenges, such as innovative funding models, workforce training and retention programs, preventive healthcare initiatives, and improved resource allocation.
  5. Consideration of Ethics: They might discuss the ethical implications of resource allocation and healthcare disparities, reflecting on the importance of equitable access to care.
  6. Global Perspective: They might mention how other healthcare systems worldwide have tackled similar challenges, offering a broader perspective on potential solutions.
  7. Effective Communication: They would communicate their thoughts coherently and engage in a dynamic discussion, acknowledging counterarguments and responding thoughtfully.
  8. Reflection: They might conclude by reflecting on the complexity of managing a healthcare system and the importance of collaborative efforts to address these challenges.

An excellent candidate would demonstrate an in-depth understanding of NHS challenges, the ability to critically analyse them, and effective communication skills. They would engage in a thought-provoking discussion, showcasing their capacity to approach complex healthcare issues from multiple angles.

MMI Practice Station: ā€œDescribing An Imageā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room where an examiner is seated. The examiner explains that you will have three minutes to describe an image to them, providing as much detail as possible. The examiner cannot see the image and relies solely on your description. Your task is to convey the image effectively through your verbal communication.

Question Stem:
“Welcome to the image description station. In front of you is an image that I cannot see. Your task is to describe this image to me in as much detail as you can. You have three minutes for your description. Use clear and concise language to convey the image effectively.”

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station assesses the candidate’s ability to communicate information clearly and effectively, especially when describing complex visual details to someone who cannot see the image. It evaluates the candidate’s communication skills, attention to detail, and capacity to convey information accurately.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Effective Communication: Candidates must convey visual details, patterns, colours, shapes, and relationships using only verbal communication.
  2. Detail and Clarity: Candidates need to provide a comprehensive and coherent description, ensuring they capture essential aspects of the image.
  3. Structuring the Description: Candidates should organise their description logically, providing context and focusing on the most salient features.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might provide a basic description of the image, discussing some features without conveying a clear and vivid mental image for the examiner.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:

An excellent candidate would approach the task with these steps:

  1. Context and Overview: They would begin by providing an overview of the image’s context and main subject, setting the scene for their description.
  2. Structuring the Description: They would systematically describe different parts of the image, moving from left to right or top to bottom, ensuring no significant details are omitted.
  3. Specific Details: They would highlight specific features such as colours, shapes, textures, patterns, and any objects or elements of interest.
  4. Comparisons and Analogies: They might use comparisons or analogies to help the examiner visualise certain aspects of the image, making the description more relatable.
  5. Emotional Impact: They could describe the emotional or visual impact of the image, emphasising its significance and potential implications.
  6. Painting a Mental Picture: They would use descriptive language that engages the examiner’s imagination, enabling them to construct a mental image.
  7. Clarifications: If the examiner asks for clarifications or specific details, they would respond promptly and with clarity.
  8. Effective Communication: They would maintain a clear and steady pace of speech, ensuring that their description flows coherently and engages the examiner’s attention.

An excellent candidate would demonstrate exceptional communication skills by effectively conveying the image’s details, allowing the examiner to form a vivid mental representation. They would create a comprehensive and engaging description that captures both the visual and emotional essence of the image.

MMI Practice Station: ā€œSelecting Essentialsā€

Station Setup:
You enter a room where an examiner is seated. In front of you is a list of 12 items, and the examiner explains that you are about to embark on a challenging trek across the Arctic. However, your sled can only accommodate seven items from the list. Your task is to select and justify the seven items you believe are essential for your survival and success during the journey.

Question Stem:
“Welcome to the preparation station for your Arctic trek. You have a list of 12 items in front of you, but your sled can only carry seven of them. Please take a moment to carefully select and justify the items you consider essential for your survival and success during the trek. You will have five minutes to make your selection and explain your choices.”

List of 12 Items:

  1. Warm, Insulated Sleeping Bag
  2. Portable Shelter/Tent
  3. High-Calorie Nutrient-Dense Food Rations
  4. Stainless Steel Water Bottle and Water Purification System
  5. Cold Weather Clothing (Insulated Layers, Waterproof Gear)
  6. GPS Navigation Device with Extra Batteries
  7. Multi-tool or Swiss Army Knife
  8. First Aid Kit with Cold-Weather Medications
  9. Flares and Emergency Signal Devices
  10. Satellite Phone for Emergency Communication
  11. Firestarter Kit (Matches, Lighter, Fire-Starting Materials)
  12. Snowshoes for Easier Movement in Snowy Terrain

Analysis of the Station:
This MMI station evaluates the candidate’s prioritisation, decision-making skills and ability to justify their choices under constraints. It assesses their critical thinking and problem-solving abilities in a practical scenario.

Challenges for Candidates:

  1. Strategic Selection: Candidates must choose items that are crucial for survival and success on an Arctic trek while staying within the given limit.
  2. Justification: Candidates need to provide clear and logical justifications for their choices, considering how each selected item contributes to their safety and well-being.
  3. Trade-offs: Candidates may need to make difficult decisions, sacrificing certain items for others based on their perceived importance.

Average Candidate’s Response:
An average candidate might select items based solely on familiarity or general importance, lacking thorough consideration of the specific challenges posed by an Arctic trek.

Excellent Candidate’s Response:
An excellent candidate would approach the task with the steps mentioned earlier in the scenario. Their choices and justifications would reflect a thorough and thoughtful analysis of the situation, showing their ability to make informed decisions under constraints.

Final Thoughts

In the realm of medical school admissions, the MMI interview stands as a unique and multifaceted challenge, requiring candidates to blend their medical knowledge with qualities like empathy, communication, and critical thinking.

While medical school interviews can be one of the most difficult aspects of the entire application process, the best way to overcome the hurdle they pose is through repetition.

Hopefully these practice MMI interview questions will have served as good examples from which you can test yourself or conduct mock interviews with friends, helping to set you up for success on the day.

About the author
After studying medicine at the University of Leicester, Dr Ollie now works as a junior doctor in London. His interests include medical education and expedition medicine, as well as having a strong belief in the importance of widening access to medicine.