BMJ OnExamination is unusual among question banks: for many candidates it is effectively free, because universities, NHS Trusts and the BMA often provide access. That changes the whole calculation. This review is honest about when BMJ OnExamination is worth using, where it falls short, and where iatroX fits when you do not have institutional access. Pricing and access are as of mid-2026 — check your own access first.
What it is
BMJ OnExamination is BMJ's long-established exam-revision platform, with questions written by specialty experts and presented as detailed clinical scenarios at exam standard. Its coverage is very broad: the UKMLA, MRCP Parts 1 and 2, MRCGP, MRCS Part A, FRCS, MRCOG, DRCOG, MRCPCH, DCH, FRCA Primary, MRCEM Primary, PLAB and several Specialty Certificate Examinations. Its defining feature is its access model rather than its size — it is the breadth and the editorial standard, under the BMJ name, that distinguish it.
What it costs
Here is the key point: many universities and NHS Trusts buy codes and provide BMJ OnExamination free to students and staff — typically two months' access to one exam at a time — and BMA membership often includes question-bank access. Outside that, it is a paid premium subscription. So before paying for anything, check whether your medical school, Trust or BMA membership already gives you access, because for a large number of candidates the effective cost is nothing. The simplest first step is to log in through your institution's library or learning portal, or check your BMA member benefits, before you ever reach the paid checkout — a surprising number of candidates pay out of pocket for access they already had through their Trust or university.
Strengths
Free institutional access is the headline advantage: where your Trust, university or BMA membership provides it, a high-quality, expert-written bank costs you nothing. The editorial standard is high, and the questions are often described as harder or more clinically nuanced, closely mimicking the tougher stems of the real exam — useful for candidates who want a rigorous challenge or are resitting. That difficulty is a feature rather than a flaw: a bank that flatters you with easy questions builds false confidence, whereas harder, more nuanced stems expose the gaps the real exam will probe. The breadth is also a genuine strength: it covers exams many rivals do not, including MRCOG and FRCS, so a single familiar platform can carry you across several different exams. That breadth has a practical value that is easy to overlook: a doctor who progresses from finals through MRCP and into a specialty exam can often stay within one familiar system rather than learning a new interface each time, and the performance tracking carries across, giving a longer-run picture of progress. For trainees sitting the harder or more niche exams, where dedicated banks are scarce, that coverage alone can justify using it, particularly when the alternative is no dedicated bank at all.
Limitations
The access that makes it attractive is also its main constraint: it is gated and time-limited — typically two months on a single exam at a time — and not every Trust or course provides every exam. The question volume is smaller than Pastest's, so it is quality over quantity rather than a vast pool. And if you do not have institutional or BMA access, the paid subscription has to be weighed against cheaper or broader alternatives.
Who it's worth it for
BMJ OnExamination is worth it for anyone with free institutional or BMA access — at that price, a high-quality bank is an easy yes — and for candidates who want harder, more nuanced stems, particularly resitters. It is also worth it for those sitting the broader or more niche exams it covers, such as MRCOG or FRCS, where options are thinner.
The verdict
If you have free access, it is absolutely worth using — there is little reason not to revise from a credible, expert-written bank that costs you nothing. If you would be paying out of pocket, the verdict is more finely balanced: weigh its curated quality and breadth against cheaper high-volume banks and the time-limited access, and decide based on which exams you need and for how long. As a rule of thumb, if it is free to you, use it; if you would be paying, treat it as one option among several rather than an automatic choice.
Where iatroX fits
iatroX is the better fit precisely when BMJ OnExamination is not freely available to you, or when you want adaptive, Socratic practice without time-limited single-exam codes. Its engine targets your weak areas, a Socratic tutor rebuilds the reasoning behind a wrong answer, spaced repetition keeps material warm, questions are blueprint-mapped, and there are native apps with no expiry. iatroX keeps MRCP Part 1, MRCEM, the PSA and PARA free, with other banks on one subscription at £29 a month or £99 a year and free samples for every exam. The two can also sit together: use BMJ OnExamination while your access lasts for its harder stems, and keep iatroX as the persistent adaptive layer that does not expire after two months.
A few common questions
Is BMJ OnExamination free? Often, via a university, NHS Trust or BMA membership — usually two months per exam. Otherwise it is a paid subscription, so check your access first.
Is it worth paying for? It is worth paying for if you lack institutional access: weigh its curated quality and breadth against cheaper high-volume banks, though for many, free access elsewhere or an adaptive bank is better value.
How does it compare with Pastest? BMJ is broader and often free via an institution but smaller in volume; Pastest is larger and deeper on MRCP and PACES but premium-priced.
Where does iatroX fit? iatroX is an adaptive option with no expiring codes — useful when you do not have BMJ access, or as a persistent layer alongside it.
<!-- ===================== SECTION: “BEST [EXAM] QUESTION BANK 2026” LISTICLES ===================== -->