Lead with the finding, because it reframes everything else: ED MCQ's structured question bank is built for the ACEM Primary examination, not the Fellowship. The app (edmcq.app) is a Primary-level MCQ tool, while the Fellowship-facing content on the ED MCQ website is largely free FOAM writing — OSCE walkthroughs, SAQ guides and exam field notes — rather than a large, structured Fellowship question bank. So if you arrived expecting a Fellowship SAQ/SCQ bank, adjust your expectations first. This audit is for registrars weighing what ED MCQ genuinely contributes to a Fellowship stack.
What ED MCQ offers for the ACEM Fellowship right now
The figures below are vendor-reported and last checked on 20 July 2026. Confirm them on the current pages before relying on them.
| Item | What ED MCQ states (vendor-reported, 20 July 2026) |
|---|---|
| Structured question app (edmcq.app) | "Over 550 questions" across "70+ ED presentation topics", added weekly, explicitly targeting the ACEM Primary Examination. No Fellowship SAQ/SCQ pool is described. |
| Fellowship-facing content (edmcq.com) | Free FOAM articles and series — including OSCE station guides and SAQ/"surviving your Fellowship exams" walkthroughs — rather than a countable Fellowship question bank. |
| AI / adaptive / analytics | None advertised on the pages reviewed. |
| Pricing and access | Not clearly published on the pages reviewed; verify current cost and access on the product site. Much of the written Fellowship content is free. |
| Components supported | Foundation-level MCQ recall (Primary) plus free Fellowship OSCE/SAQ orientation. It does not provide a structured Fellowship SCQ or SAQ bank, and it is not the examination. |
The honest reading is that "ED MCQ" is two things wearing one name: a Primary-level question app and a free Fellowship blog. Both are useful; neither is a Fellowship question bank in the sense the search term implies.
The exam you are actually training for
The ACEM Fellowship written examination is two 180-minute papers, six hours total: a Short Answer Question paper and a Single/Select Choice Question (multiple-choice) paper. The clinical OSCE is separate — up to twelve stations of eleven minutes each (four minutes reading, seven minutes assessment), 132 minutes over two consecutive days. The written papers sample the FACEM Curriculum Framework, dominated at written level by Medical Expertise and Prioritisation and Decision Making, and ACEM does not publish fixed percentage weightings, so beware any third-party "blueprint" presented as official. The fuller format and blueprint treatment lives in the ACEM Fellowship content-gap checklist.
Where does iatroX sit? iatroX covers the ACEM Primary examination — a foundation-knowledge and unseen single-best-answer bank at Primary-level anatomy, physiology, pharmacology and pathology. It is not a Fellowship SAQ, SCQ or OSCE product. Note the neat overlap: ED MCQ's question app and iatroX operate at the same Primary level, so for a Fellowship candidate both are foundation tools, not Fellowship-level banks — a point that shapes how you should combine them.
The live count, and what it is a count of
The headline "550+ questions" is real, but it is a count of ACEM Primary items, not Fellowship SCQs. Broken against the written blueprint you actually face, that pool builds the recall floor — the underpinning physiology and pharmacology — beneath domains such as resuscitation, cardiology, respiratory, toxicology and paediatrics, but it does not supply the application-level, management-sequencing SCQs the Fellowship paper asks. Do not read a Primary question total as Fellowship coverage; the number answers a different question from the one you are sitting.
Sample question style: recall versus application
The single most important transfer question is whether items test recall or application. Primary-style items — ED MCQ's strength — tend to be shorter-stemmed and knowledge-anchored: identify the mechanism, the receptor, the vessel, the value. The Fellowship SCQ paper leans towards application: a clinical stem, plausible distractors that are all "not wrong", and a decision about the next best action under uncertainty. A bank of well-written recall items sharpens the foundation but under-trains the discrimination between four defensible options that decides Fellowship marks. Judge any ED MCQ item you use on stem length, option plausibility, whether it forces a management sequence, and whether it uses images or data — the features that predict transfer.
Jurisdiction and recency
Emergency medicine is jurisdiction-sensitive, and this is where recency review earns its keep. Australasian practice has its own toxinology and envenomation (snake, spider, marine), its own resuscitation guidance (ANZCOR), its own retrieval and rural-transfer realities, and state, territory and New Zealand variation in mental-health legislation. Sample a stratified handful of the items you rely on and check them against current Australasian guidance, recording the review date. Free and frequently updated content has the advantage of currency but the risk of uneven editorial control, so verify rather than assume.
The format gap: what no MCQ bank can build
State this plainly: a standard multiple-choice bank — Primary or Fellowship — cannot prepare you for SAQ construction, OSCE performance, or calibration against an examiner rubric. The SAQ paper rewards structured written answers under time pressure; the OSCE rewards spoken reasoning, examination technique and communication across twelve stations. ED MCQ's free Fellowship writing helps orient you to those formats, which is a genuine contribution, but reading an OSCE guide is not the same as being marked in one. Budget separately for SAQ drills and supervised OSCE practice.
Duplication and contamination
Because ED MCQ's Primary pool is finite and grows incrementally, the risk on repeated passes is that bank completion quietly becomes bank recognition — you start recalling the item rather than reasoning the answer. Watch for near-duplicate stems testing the same concept, and treat a rising score on repeated items as a familiarity artefact, not learning. The antidote is to keep at least one unseen, never-repeated channel for measurement, so a real signal survives however many times you loop the Primary set.
Best-fit matrix: where ED MCQ actually belongs
| Use case | Fit for a Fellowship candidate |
|---|---|
| Foundation building (Primary-level recall) | Strong — this is what the app is for. |
| First pass of the Fellowship written | Weak — no structured Fellowship SCQ/SAQ pool. |
| Second bank alongside a Fellowship bank | Situational — useful only to shore up foundational gaps, not to add Fellowship-level volume. |
| Retake diagnosis | Limited — helpful for confirming a shaky knowledge floor, not for OSCE/SAQ remediation. |
| Final simulation | Poor — it does not reproduce the timed written papers or the OSCE. |
A seven-day pattern around clinical shifts
Use ED MCQ for one defined job — shoring up the Primary-level knowledge floor and orienting to Fellowship formats via its free guides — and iatroX for a separate, unseen check on that same foundation. No claim is made about either tool's internal mechanics.
- Day 1: 30 ED MCQ Primary items in your weakest system; code every miss by cause.
- Day 2: Read one ED MCQ Fellowship OSCE or SAQ guide, then attempt a matching SAQ from memory and mark it against a model answer.
- Day 3: A short iatroX block of unseen Primary-level items in the same system, to confirm the floor is solid rather than just familiar.
- Day 4 (clinical): Convert a real presentation from your shift into a structured SAQ-style answer; no new bank work.
- Day 5: 40 mixed Primary items, timed; tally the week's error codes.
- Day 6: Fellowship-level written practice from a purpose-built Fellowship source (not ED MCQ), timed and cold.
- Day 7: Review, sorting misses into "re-read the source" versus "drill a fresh transfer item".
Decision checklist: continue, supplement, switch or stop
- Continue with ED MCQ if your job for it is foundation recall and format orientation, and your Primary-level accuracy is still improving.
- Supplement immediately with a purpose-built Fellowship written resource, because ED MCQ does not supply structured Fellowship SCQ/SAQ volume.
- Switch the measurement role away from any repeated ED MCQ items to an unseen channel once you notice recognition creeping in.
- Stop relying on it as your Fellowship written backbone the moment you mistake Primary coverage for Fellowship readiness — that is the specific error this audit exists to prevent.
The bottom line
ED MCQ is a useful, often free resource, but not the thing the search term suggests. Its structured questions are a Primary-level tool, and its Fellowship value is free educational writing rather than a Fellowship question bank. Use it to firm up your knowledge floor and to orient to the SAQ and OSCE formats, then get your Fellowship-level written volume, your SAQ marking and your OSCE practice from purpose-built sources — and keep one unseen channel clean for measurement.
Frequently asked questions
Is ED MCQ enough for ACEM Fellowship on its own? No, and it does not claim to be a complete Fellowship product. Its structured question app targets the ACEM Primary examination, and its Fellowship content is free orientation writing rather than a large SCQ/SAQ bank. It can build and check the foundational knowledge the Fellowship assumes, but it will not, by itself, supply the application-level written volume, the SAQ marking, or the OSCE practice a Fellowship candidate needs. Treat it as a foundation and orientation layer within a broader stack.
Which ACEM Fellowship component does ED MCQ not reproduce well? All three of the Fellowship's distinctive demands, to different degrees: it does not provide a structured Fellowship SCQ paper experience, it does not mark constructed SAQ answers against an examiner rubric, and it does not stage the twelve-station OSCE. Its free written guides describe the OSCE and SAQ formats helpfully, but description is not simulation. The OSCE in particular is entirely outside what any MCQ product delivers.
How many ED MCQ questions should I complete per day for ACEM Fellowship? Because the app's questions are Primary-level, volume here is about maintaining a knowledge floor, not building Fellowship readiness. One focused block of 20 to 40 items in your weakest system, coded for error type, is plenty; grinding hundreds of Primary recall items while the Fellowship written and OSCE go unpractised is a misallocation. Spend the marginal hour on Fellowship-level written practice and OSCE rehearsal instead.
When should I stop using ED MCQ and move to mixed mocks? Stop leaning on it as soon as your foundational recall is stable and you notice repeated items becoming recognition rather than reasoning. At that point your time belongs in mixed, timed, Fellowship-level written mocks and in supervised OSCE practice, which ED MCQ does not provide. Keep it, if at all, as an occasional foundation top-up, not as your main pre-exam simulation.
How should I combine ED MCQ with iatroX without duplicating practice? Recognise that both operate at ACEM Primary level, so the risk of duplication is real. Use one of them — say ED MCQ — for learning and foundation drilling, and reserve iatroX strictly for unseen, timed measurement of that same foundation, never re-importing an item you have already met. Do not run both as parallel Primary banks hoping for Fellowship coverage; that duplicates the level you already have and still leaves the Fellowship-specific written and OSCE work undone.
Editorial notes and references
Written by Dr Kolawole Tytler, NHS GP and founder of iatroX. Last checked 20 July 2026. All ED MCQ figures — question counts, topics and scope — are vendor-reported as displayed on the ED MCQ site and app on that date and can change; verify them on the current pages, and confirm the examination format and fees on acem.org.au. Honesty flag: ED MCQ's structured question bank targets the ACEM Primary examination, not the Fellowship; its Fellowship-facing content is largely free FOAM writing rather than a structured Fellowship question bank, and this article is an honest coverage audit on that basis. Disclosure: iatroX operates a competing bank, but only at ACEM Primary level; it is not a Fellowship product and is confined here to unseen measurement of foundational knowledge. Corrections are welcome via the feedback route on iatrox.com. References: Australasian College for Emergency Medicine examination and FACEM curriculum pages (acem.org.au); ED MCQ website and app pages; iatroX ACEM Primary bank, the comparison hub, the two-Q-bank rule, and Your Q-Bank Percentage Is Not Your Exam Score.
Test your ACEM foundation knowledge on fresh, timed iatroX questions →