A short-answer-only revision plan is no longer sufficient for candidates preparing for the CCFP written examination in 2027. Keep practising recall, but add the separate skill of choosing precisely among plausible alternatives. Knowing what you would write and recognising which listed answers satisfy the task are related abilities, not the same exercise.
The CFPC examination page, checked on 13 September 2026, states that up to 25% of cases in 2026 use multiple-choice or short-menu formats, with all cases using those formats in 2027. That statement concerns the written component; it does not abolish the need to prepare separately for the oral assessment.
Keep the knowledge, change the final response task
Older short-answer notes can still contain useful clinical reasoning. Their age alone does not make them worthless. The problem arises when a candidate treats a remembered list as a complete response regardless of the question's wording, the options provided or the number of selections requested.
Retain a note that explains why an investigation matters. Rework a note that merely lists every investigation ever associated with the presentation. In selected-response practice, each extra possibility has to compete with the actual task. "Could be useful" is not an adequate justification for choosing it now.
Use the College's sample SAMP material, reviewed on 13 September 2026, as the reference for format. It demonstrates the difference between a single-choice response and a question requesting several selections. A commercial provider may use the familiar SAMP label while updating its questions, or may retain older material for a different educational purpose. Check the examples rather than judging the product by its name alone.
An original short-menu exercise
The following is an educational task-parsing exercise, not an official CFPC item or a clinical management protocol.
A fictional patient returns after an investigation. They have not understood the result, are uncertain who will arrange the next appointment and are considering not attending because of transport difficulties. The clinician has already established that no new urgent symptoms require immediate reassessment. The task is to select the two actions that most directly resolve the stated communication and follow-up problems.
The options are: explain the result in accessible language and check understanding; clarify who will arrange follow-up and discuss the transport obstacle; repeat the same technical description more slowly; supply a long list of unrelated screening advice; or assume non-attendance means refusal of treatment.
For this deliberately bounded exercise, the first two options address the stated gaps. The lesson is not that these actions answer every follow-up question. It is that each selection needs a connection to the problem and the requested output.
Now change only the instruction: select the single action that best checks the patient's understanding of the result. The question no longer asks you to resolve the whole follow-up problem. Explaining the result and inviting the patient to describe their understanding addresses that narrower task; arranging transport does not establish understanding. Keep the other concern on the clinical agenda, but do not answer a different examination question.
Use recall before selection
Try an original case with the answer options temporarily covered. State the clinical problem and your provisional next step. Then reveal the menu and choose the requested response. Finally, explain why the nearest alternative does not fit.
Keep the two stages separate in your notes. A correct initial plan followed by the wrong selection suggests an interpretation or discrimination problem. An incorrect initial plan suggests that the underlying knowledge needs attention. A correct selection reached only after recognising a familiar phrase deserves another attempt with a changed case.
There is no need to assign a universal numerical target to this exercise. Its purpose is to reveal the type of work required next, not generate an unofficial pass prediction.
Check what CanadaQBank and The Review Course currently provide
This article is published by iatroX and includes our learning tools alongside other resources. On 13 September 2026, CanadaQBank's CFPC-FM page described an updated resource but still explicitly described write-in SAMP cases alongside SOO material. That wording does not establish complete selected-response coverage for 2027. Ask for a current demonstration before purchasing specifically to practise the new response formats.
The Review Course, checked on the same date, advertised a free SAMP pack updated for 2026 with a preview of the new question types, alongside its teaching offer. A preview is useful for checking the teaching approach; it is not evidence that every component of a paid package reproduces the revised examination. These observations concern public product descriptions, not results from a comparative teaching trial.
Before purchasing, inspect a current sample and ask which written formats it covers. Establish whether older questions have been replaced, supplemented or retained with clear labels. A provider can be useful for rebuilding a topic even when a particular lesson is not a faithful reproduction of the current examination format.
| Resource-checking field | What to record |
|---|---|
| Intended sitting | The examination cycle you are preparing for |
| Sample inspected | Product page and date, without copying paid content |
| Response format | Written recall, single selection or short menu |
| Explanation quality | Why the chosen and nearest rejected options differ |
| Missing practice | The response task you still need to rehearse |
Build a week that exposes both kinds of error
Start with a small sample from an unfamiliar topic. Review the reasoning, not just the score, and allocate the next session accordingly. Someone who cannot explain the clinical principle needs focused teaching before another timed block. Someone who understands it but chooses unnecessary options needs option-level review.
Finish the week with unseen cases from the same broad domain, not an immediate reset of the identical questions. Keep timing realistic, but do not turn every learning session into a mock examination. The review stage is where you establish which uncertainty was clinical and which came from the menu.
Where iatroX fits
iatroX's September 2026 learning offer combines question banks, Socratic Tutor, an exam-date-aware planner, simulations and CPD tools. For CCFP preparation, use questions and Tutor to investigate why a selected answer appeared preferable. Check interface fit separately: reasoning practice does not establish that every question reproduces the College's new short-menu format.
The published iatroX UK price, checked on 13 September 2026, is £99 paid upfront for a year, equivalent to £8.25 a month billed annually, or £29 monthly. Simulations and CPD are included with the learning subscription, not separate add-ons. These are GBP prices, not Canadian-dollar quotations.
Keep CanadaQBank when its cases and explanations are helping you retrieve and apply the knowledge, but verify the new response formats separately. Consider The Review Course when structured teaching is the missing element. Use iatroX when the useful addition is question-specific guided reasoning and further practice. None of those choices removes the need to inspect the College's current samples.
Frequently asked questions
Should I throw away my older SAMP notes?
No, retain accurate explanations and rework lists that encourage indiscriminate answering. Check the current assessment format and the currency of the clinical content separately.
Does the 2027 change mean recall practice is unnecessary?
No. Recalling a provisional answer before seeing the menu can help reveal whether the options are compensating for a knowledge gap.
Can I assume a product labelled SAMP contains only short-answer questions?
No, providers may retain the label while changing their material. Inspect dated samples and ask about coverage for your intended sitting.