This audit is for RACGP registrars weighing eMedici as their main written-exam bank. It addresses the AKT and KFP most directly, and its principal limitation is one of shape rather than quality: eMedici is a strong, explanation-led question bank whose AKT volume greatly outweighs its KFP volume, and whose GP product does not itself cover the clinical exam. Knowing that shape is what lets you use it well and bolt on what it does not provide.
The aim here is not a "best bank" ranking — those exist elsewhere and duplicate poorly. It is a component-by-component map so you can see exactly what eMedici tests, where it overlaps itself, and where the gaps sit.
What eMedici offers for RACGP Fellowship right now
Vendor-reported and last checked 19 July 2026; confirm current figures on emedici.com, as counts and pricing change.
| Item | Vendor-reported position (19 July 2026) |
|---|---|
| AKT questions | 2,800+ single-best-answer questions with detailed referenced explanations |
| KFP questions | 330+ questions with detailed explanations |
| Mocks | 2× AKT and 2× KFP blueprinted mock exams |
| Explanations | Full referenced explanation per item, reviewed by topic experts; high-yield learning points |
| Study tools | Highlighting and note-taking within items |
| Analytics | Individual performance plus cohort comparison, broken down by curriculum area |
| AI / adaptive | None advertised |
| Community | None advertised |
| Clinical exam | Not in the GP product; a separate GPRA Clinical Cases product exists |
| Access & price | One-time subscriptions: 3 months A$499.99; 6 months A$699.99; 12 months A$899.99 (no auto-renewal) |
The headline is the ratio: an AKT bank of real depth, a KFP bank roughly a tenth of the size, no AI tutor, and no consultation practice inside this product. None of that is a fault; it just tells you what eMedici is for.
The exam you are actually preparing for
The RACGP Fellowship written examinations are the AKT — 150 single-best-answer questions — and the KFP — 70 individual multiple-selection questions, each case independent. Both are paper-based with computer-readable answer sheets; confirm the current time allowed per paper on racgp.org.au, as published durations have varied. The CCE is the separate clinical/consultation component, reported in score bands (F4–P4). Map every eMedici feature back to these three, and treat the college's curriculum and guides as the authority.
Inventory the platform by component
| Component | Present in eMedici GP product? | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Question bank | Yes | 2,800+ AKT, 330+ KFP |
| Notes / study text | Partial | Delivered as per-item explanations and high-yield points, not a standalone notes library |
| Videos | Not advertised | — |
| Flashcards | Not advertised | — |
| Mock exams | Yes | 2× AKT, 2× KFP, blueprinted |
| AI tutor / adaptive | No | — |
| Analytics | Yes | Individual + cohort, by curriculum area |
| Community | Not advertised | — |
| Human feedback | Indirect | Expert-reviewed explanations, not live marking |
The inventory makes the design philosophy plain: eMedici concentrates on questions and the explanations attached to them, with strong analytics, and deliberately leaves out the video, flashcard, AI and community layers that other platforms bundle. That focus is a reasonable trade — but it means you must supply the missing modalities yourself.
Map each component to the official format
- The AKT bank maps directly and deeply to the 150-item single-best-answer paper; this is eMedici's strongest fit.
- The KFP bank maps to the 70-item multiple-selection paper, but the 330+ volume is modest for a format that rewards a very particular selection discipline — you may exhaust it before you have automated that discipline.
- The mocks map to full-paper conditions and are where you should test stamina and pacing.
- The analytics map to your coverage audit, and the cohort comparison is genuinely useful for locating yourself against peers.
- Nothing in the GP product maps to the CCE; that is by design, and the separate GPRA Clinical Cases product is where eMedici points you instead.
Where do features test the same thing twice? Largely they do not — eMedici is lean, so there is little internal redundancy. The per-item explanations and the high-yield points overlap somewhat, but that is reinforcement rather than waste.
Content-fidelity audit
On fidelity, the strengths are the referenced, expert-reviewed explanations and the curriculum-area tagging, which make the bank auditable against the blueprint. Test the following yourself before committing: blueprint coverage across all contextual units (use the analytics to find thin areas); cognitive level (does it stretch beyond recall into applied judgement, which the KFP demands?); image and data use (verify how often clinical images and result trends appear); recency (check that guidance-sensitive explanations cite current Australian sources such as Therapeutic Guidelines); jurisdiction (that answers reflect Australian primary care, not overseas norms); and explanation quality (whether the reasoning teaches the principle or merely states the fact). eMedici positions itself well on explanation quality and referencing; the areas to verify for yourself are image use and KFP-level applied reasoning.
Workflow audit
A good platform lets you move smoothly from diagnosing a weakness to fixing it and proving the fix. In eMedici, the analytics diagnose the weakness by curriculum area; the explanations and high-yield points teach it; the bank lets you retrieve it; and the mocks let you retest under conditions. The link that is missing is an automated retrieval or spacing engine — there is no adaptive scheduler — so you must drive the spacing manually or with a second tool. The loop is complete but hand-cranked.
The modality gap
Three gaps matter. First, key-feature reasoning volume: 330+ KFP items is enough to learn the format but may be thin for automating the selection discipline the real KFP rewards, so ration it and consider a second KFP source. Second, consultation skills: the GP product does not train the CCE at all — you must add supervised consultation practice, and eMedici's own GPRA Clinical Cases or another resource for the clinical stage. Third, active spacing and unseen measurement: with no adaptive engine, you need an external way to space your misses and to test transfer on items you have not seen.
Decision table: best use by situation
| Your situation | Is eMedici a good primary fit? | What to add |
|---|---|---|
| Early prep, need AKT breadth | Yes — deep AKT bank | Manual spacing plan |
| KFP is your weak component | Partly — learn the format here | A second KFP source for volume |
| Preparing the CCE | No — not in this product | Supervised consultation + clinical-case resource |
| Limited budget, want no frills | Yes — lean, one-time pricing | Free official material for calibration |
| Want an AI tutor / adaptive engine | No — not offered | A platform that provides it |
A seven-day pattern for Australian GP registrars
This gives eMedici one job — AKT breadth and blueprinted mocks with cohort analytics — and iatroX a different job: unseen AKT-style measurement and spaced retrieval of the misses. iatroX covers RACGP AKT-style knowledge and is not a CCE consultation simulator; treat any adaptive sequencing as vendor-described and judge it by your unseen scores alone.
- Day 1: An eMedici AKT set in your weakest curriculum area (found via the analytics); read the referenced explanations properly.
- Day 2: Re-test the Day 1 misses as unseen AKT-style items in iatroX to check transfer, not recognition.
- Day 3: A focused eMedici KFP set; because volume is limited, work slowly on the selection discipline rather than racing.
- Day 4: An eMedici blueprinted AKT mock under time; log errors by type.
- Day 5: Supervised consultation practice for the CCE (outside eMedici's GP product); this gap must be filled deliberately.
- Day 6: A mixed unseen iatroX block under time to rehearse pacing and confirm retention.
- Day 7: Review the week's error types and the cohort comparison; set next week's quotas, weighting KFP and any thin curriculum areas.
Decision checklist: continue, supplement, switch or stop
- Continue with eMedici as your AKT engine if its explanations are teaching you and the cohort analytics show you closing gaps.
- Supplement with a second KFP source, supervised CCE practice, and iatroX for unseen measurement and spacing — the three modalities the GP product does not cover.
- Switch your primary bank only if a measurable need it cannot meet (adaptive scheduling, far larger KFP volume) matters more than its explanation quality — not for novelty.
- Stop adding question access when your gaps are consolidation and consulting rather than coverage; a stable unseen score, not an unfinished bank, is the signal.
Frequently asked questions
Is eMedici enough for RACGP Fellowship on its own? For the AKT it is a strong, explanation-led option that many candidates could build the bulk of their written preparation around; but it is not enough on its own, because its KFP volume is comparatively small and its GP product does not train the CCE at all. Plan to add a second KFP source and dedicated, supervised consultation practice, and treat eMedici as your AKT core rather than a complete Fellowship solution.
Which RACGP Fellowship component does eMedici not reproduce well? The CCE, which its GP product does not attempt — you are pointed to a separate clinical-cases product and will still need supervised, observed consultation practice — and, to a lesser degree, the KFP, where the 330+ item volume is enough to learn the format but thin for automating the selection discipline. The AKT is the component eMedici reproduces best; the further you move toward the clinical exam, the more you must add from elsewhere.
How many eMedici questions should I complete per day for RACGP Fellowship? There is no single right number; anchor the day to reviewing every question thoroughly rather than to a target count, since the referenced explanations are where the learning is. A workable pattern for many registrars is one focused set of around 20–30 AKT items reviewed in depth plus a smaller, slower KFP set, adjusted to protect the limited KFP bank — but let your coverage analytics, not a fixed quota, decide where the day's questions go.
When should I stop using eMedici and move to mixed mocks? Shift the weight to full mixed mocks once your single-area accuracy is consistent and the cohort analytics show no domain lagging badly, because at that point pacing and stamina across a whole paper are the limiting factors that themed sets cannot train. eMedici's own blueprinted mocks are a reasonable place to start that transition; keep some in the final few weeks, and reserve unseen material so the mocks measure readiness rather than memory.
How should I combine eMedici with iatroX without duplicating practice? Give them separate jobs and never run the same items in both. eMedici supplies AKT breadth and teaching explanations; iatroX supplies unseen AKT-style questions for measurement and spaced retrieval of your misses, plus a Socratic tutor for the reasoning — and because iatroX is a knowledge and measurement layer, not a CCE simulator, there is no overlap with the consultation gap you fill elsewhere. The two-Q-bank rule keeps the second bank as a clean measurement source.
Editorial notes and references
Written by Dr Kolawole Tytler, NHS GP and founder of iatroX. Last checked 19 July 2026; eMedici question counts, mock inclusions, analytics and prices are vendor-reported and change without notice — verify the current figures on emedici.com before relying on them, and note that the clinical exam is served by a separate eMedici product, not the GP written bank audited here. Disclosure: iatroX operates a competing RACGP question bank; its role here is confined to unseen AKT-style measurement, spaced retrieval and a Socratic tutor — jobs eMedici's lean written product does not provide — and iatroX is not a CCE consultation simulator. Corrections are welcome via the feedback route on iatrox.com.
References: RACGP AKT, KFP and CCE examination pages and curriculum (racgp.org.au); the eMedici GP product pages (emedici.com) for vendor-reported features and pricing; iatroX internal references — Your Q-Bank Percentage Is Not Your Exam Score, the two-Q-bank rule and the RACGP Fellowship bank landing page.