This checklist is for higher specialty trainees in endocrinology and diabetes, usually ST4 and above, who have worked through most of a question bank and want a defensible way to decide whether they have covered the SCE — not just finished a product. The minimum evidence that you have covered the blueprint is not a completion percentage. It is every curriculum domain attempted under timed conditions, first-attempt accuracy recorded domain by domain, guidance-sensitive topics checked against current UK sources, and a recent unseen mixed block that reproduces the two-paper format. If any of those is missing, you have not finished; you have run out of one bank's questions. Treat what follows as a set of things to verify, not a study timetable.
The current SCE Endocrinology and Diabetes snapshot
The SCE in Endocrinology and Diabetes is set by the Federation of Royal Colleges of Physicians (MRCP(UK)). It is two papers of 100 best-of-five (BOF) questions — 200 questions in total — with each paper lasting three hours, sat on one day at a test centre on the Surpass computer-based platform. Each correct answer scores one mark and there is no negative marking, so every item is worth answering even when you are guessing. The pass mark is set by criterion-referencing against the standard expected of a trainee completing specialty training, so it moves slightly with paper difficulty rather than being a fixed percentage.
The content is drawn from the JRCPTB specialty curriculum, and the paper samples across the whole curriculum by a predetermined blueprint. The Federation and the specialty pages describe the domains rather than publishing fixed per-domain percentages, so the honest position is that every domain is examinable and none should be treated as low-yield. In practice, candidate reports and the published curriculum point to diabetes and its complications, thyroid, pituitary and adrenal disease carrying consistent weight, with reproductive, calcium and bone, and the "general internal medicine at the endocrine interface" areas rounding out the paper. Treat any weighting you have seen quoted as indicative, not official.
Build a blueprint coverage table
Completion tells you how many questions you answered. It does not tell you which parts of the blueprint you actually tested. The single most useful artefact before you stop is a coverage table with one row per domain and five columns: official weight (indicative), questions attempted, first-attempt accuracy, last reviewed, and confidence. First-attempt accuracy matters far more than your cumulative percentage, because re-attempted questions measure recognition, not recall. Our companion piece on why a Q-bank percentage is not your exam score explains why the headline number flatters you.
| Domain | Weight (indicative) | Q attempted | First-attempt accuracy | Last reviewed | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diabetes: diagnosis & management | High | 140 | 78% | 3 days | Medium |
| Diabetic emergencies & acute illness | High | 60 | 71% | 6 days | Medium |
| Diabetes complications | High | 55 | 74% | 8 days | Medium |
| Hypothalamus & pituitary | Medium | 48 | 62% | 2 weeks | Low |
| Thyroid | High | 70 | 80% | 5 days | High |
| Adrenal | Medium | 44 | 66% | 11 days | Low |
| Gonads / reproductive | Medium | 22 | 55% | 4 weeks | Low |
| Parathyroid, calcium & bone | Medium | 30 | 60% | 3 weeks | Low |
| Other (lipids, NETs, pregnancy, Na/water) | Variable | 18 | 50% | 5 weeks | Low |
The figures above are an illustrative worked example, not real data. Filled honestly with your own numbers, the table exposes the pattern self-selected practice hides: the domains with the fewest attempted questions and the oldest review dates are usually the ones you have been quietly avoiding, and they are where your first-attempt accuracy is lowest. That intersection — low volume, old review, low accuracy — is your real content gap.
Ten domain-level blind spots most likely to stay hidden
Self-selected practice tends to over-sample the topics you already enjoy. These ten areas are the ones that most often remain thin, and each should be verified against exam-specific clinician review before you conclude you are covered.
- Endocrine hypertension — screening and confirmatory testing for primary aldosteronism, phaeochromocytoma work-up, and the interpretation pitfalls of the aldosterone-to-renin ratio.
- Dynamic function testing — short Synacthen, the insulin tolerance test, oral glucose tolerance testing for acromegaly, and overnight versus low-dose dexamethasone suppression, including how interfering medication changes the result.
- Disorders of sodium and water — SIADH versus cerebral salt wasting, cranial versus nephrogenic diabetes insipidus, and the place of copeptin in the modern work-up.
- Calcium and metabolic bone disease beyond primary hyperparathyroidism — hypocalcaemia, familial hypocalciuric hypercalcaemia, osteomalacia, Paget's disease and the pharmacology of osteoporosis treatment.
- Reproductive endocrinology — Turner and Klinefelter syndromes, male and female hypogonadism, the nuances of polycystic ovary syndrome, and gender-affirming hormone therapy.
- Endocrinology in pregnancy — gestational diabetes thresholds, thyroid management across trimesters, and pituitary disease including Sheehan syndrome and lymphocytic hypophysitis.
- Neuroendocrine tumours and familial syndromes — carcinoid, insulinoma and gastrinoma, and the MEN 1 and MEN 2 phenotypes with their genetic testing implications.
- Diabetes technology and newer therapeutics — continuous and flash glucose monitoring, closed-loop insulin delivery, and the safe-prescribing detail behind GLP-1 receptor agonists, dual agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors, including euglycaemic diabetic ketoacidosis risk.
- Pituitary disease in depth — the differential of Cushing's syndrome including ectopic ACTH and inferior petrosal sinus sampling, acromegaly medical therapy, and hypopituitarism replacement and apoplexy.
- Endocrine complications of cancer therapy — immune checkpoint inhibitor endocrinopathies (hypophysitis, thyroiditis, adrenal insufficiency, type 1 diabetes), an area that sits at the endocrine-oncology interface and is easy to miss.
Format checklist: the things a bank alone under-trains
A standard multiple-choice bank teaches facts efficiently but under-trains three things this exam rewards. First, dynamic testing: verify you can move from a set of timed biochemistry values to the correct interpretation and next step, not just recognise the named test. Second, guideline recency: the exam expects current UK practice, so confirm you are revising against present-day NICE, SIGN, Joint British Diabetes Societies, British Thyroid Association and DVLA positions rather than a bank explanation written several updates ago. Third, interpretation of endocrine investigations under time pressure — the ability to read a suppression or stimulation profile, a thyroid function panel with antibodies, or a calcium-PTH-vitamin D picture and act on it.
Interpretation checklist
Confirm you have deliberately practised each of these data types, because they recur throughout the paper and are rarely the topic you would choose to drill: laboratory trends across dynamic tests and serial biochemistry; imaging described in stems or shown as images (pituitary MRI, adrenal CT phenotyping, thyroid ultrasound and eye disease, DXA reports); ECGs in endocrine emergencies (hyperkalaemia in adrenal crisis, QT prolongation in hypocalcaemia); and calculations you should be able to do without hesitation — corrected calcium, plasma and urine osmolality, fluid and insulin regimens, and free-water deficit. Add the ethics-and-professionalism and statistics-and-critical-appraisal threads that appear across MRCP(UK) assessments, including consent, capacity and the reading of a trial's hazard ratio or number needed to treat.
Recency checklist
Endocrinology and diabetes move quickly, so identify the guidance-sensitive topics and record, for each source you rely on, its publication date and jurisdiction. The highest-churn areas at present include the expanding indications and safety framing of GLP-1 receptor agonists and dual incretin agonists; SGLT2 inhibitor indications across diabetes, heart failure and chronic kidney disease; automated insulin delivery and monitoring technology; thyroid disease in pregnancy; and osteoporosis treatment pathways. Medicines detail should be taken from the Summary of Product Characteristics via the electronic medicines compendium rather than a secondary source, and every fact should carry a date and a jurisdiction so you are not revising a superseded position or an international recommendation that differs from UK commissioning.
Performance checklist: the readiness signals that actually count
Before you stop doing new questions, confirm five performance signals. Unseen — your recent accuracy is on questions you have not seen before, not on a re-run of a completed bank. Timed — you are working at roughly 100 questions in 180 minutes, about 1.8 minutes per item, with time to review flagged questions. Mixed — you can hold accuracy in a blueprint-blind block that jumps between domains, which is how the real paper feels. High-confidence errors — you are tracking the questions you got wrong while feeling sure, because these are the dangerous ones that a percentage hides. Official-material calibration — you have tested yourself against the Federation's own sample questions and online practice test, which are the closest thing to the real item style. Retention closes the loop: re-test a domain a week after you first mastered it, because knowledge that has not survived a spacing interval is not yet exam-ready.
Stop or continue: a decision tree
Use the measured gap, not novelty or the fact that a bank still has unanswered questions. If a domain shows low volume, low first-attempt accuracy and an old review date, continue new questions there — you have a genuine coverage gap. If accuracy is high but only on re-attempts, consolidate: stop adding questions and space your retrieval so recognition becomes recall. If per-domain accuracy is adequate but your timed, mixed, unseen score lags, simulate: sit full-length blended blocks under exam conditions. If the same misconception keeps recurring despite review, seek teaching from a consultant or a structured course rather than grinding more items. And if your unseen scores have plateaued and your errors are careless rather than knowledge-based, rest and taper — fatigue, not ignorance, is now your limiting factor. Adding questions in that last state lowers your score.
One-page checklist and worked example
Copy this into your notes as a one-page gate. You are ready to stop adding new questions when: every domain has been attempted under timed conditions; first-attempt accuracy is recorded per domain and no domain is both low-volume and low-accuracy; guidance-sensitive topics are dated and jurisdiction-checked; you have completed at least one full-length unseen mixed block near exam pace; your high-confidence error log is shrinking; and you have calibrated against the Federation's official sample questions.
Worked example, using illustrative data: a candidate has completed 4,000 questions across a specialty bank and reports 82% overall. On the coverage table their first-attempt accuracy is 78% in diabetes but 55% in reproductive endocrinology and 50% in the "other" cluster, both last reviewed over a month ago. The 82% is real but misleading — it is inflated by re-attempts and by heavy sampling of diabetes. The correct action is not to keep going to "finish the bank"; it is to run fresh, unseen reproductive and metabolic-bone blocks, calibrate against official samples, and simulate a mixed paper. The completion-is-not-coverage matrix is the framework this table implements.
Where iatroX fits
iatroX is not a specialty-specific endocrinology SCE bank, and it does not claim to be. It provides a broad UK, MRCP-level knowledge base with unseen questions and spaced, mixed retrieval, which makes it a useful measurement layer alongside a dedicated SCE bank such as StudyPRN or Licence Medical. Use a specialty bank to build endocrine coverage, then use iatroX in standard mode to run an unseen syllabus audit and confirm whether your gains transfer to questions you have never seen. That division of labour is exactly the two-Q-bank rule: a primary bank for coverage, a second, unseen bank for honest measurement. You can also compare tools on the iatroX comparison hub.
Frequently asked questions
How do I know whether I have covered the full SCE Endocrinology and Diabetes blueprint? You know when you can produce a coverage table that shows every domain in the JRCPTB curriculum attempted under timed conditions, with first-attempt accuracy recorded and no domain left both low-volume and low-accuracy. Because the Federation samples the whole curriculum rather than publishing fixed weightings, "covered" means you have deliberately tested the unglamorous areas — reproductive endocrinology, calcium and bone, sodium and water, endocrine hypertension, pregnancy — not only diabetes and thyroid. A completion percentage cannot answer this question; a domain-by-domain map can.
Can one question bank be enough for SCE Endocrinology and Diabetes? One well-built specialty bank can carry most of your coverage, but it cannot honestly measure your readiness, because once you have seen its questions your accuracy on them reflects recognition rather than recall. The practical answer is that one bank is enough for learning and a second, unseen source is needed for measurement. That is not a sales point; it is the reason experienced candidates keep a small pool of genuinely unseen questions and the official samples in reserve for the final weeks.
What should I measure instead of my overall Q-bank percentage for SCE Endocrinology and Diabetes? Measure first-attempt accuracy by domain, your timed and mixed unseen score, your high-confidence error rate, and your retention across a one-week spacing interval. The overall percentage blends re-attempts, uneven domain sampling and easy questions into a single flattering figure. The four measures above tell you where the gaps are, whether your knowledge survives exam conditions, and whether it is durable — which is what the exam actually tests.
When should I stop doing new SCE Endocrinology and Diabetes questions? Stop when every domain has been attempted under timed conditions, no domain is both low-volume and low-accuracy, your unseen mixed score has stabilised at a comfortable margin above the standard, and your remaining errors are careless rather than knowledge-based. At that point additional new questions add fatigue, not information, and your effort is better spent on spaced retrieval of known weak points and full-length simulation. Continuing to "finish the bank" past this gate tends to lower scores.
Which SCE Endocrinology and Diabetes resource should I use for my weakest component? Match the resource to the deficit. If the gap is factual coverage, a dedicated specialty bank such as StudyPRN or Licence Medical, plus a focused text such as the Oxford best-of-five title, is the efficient route. If the gap is interpretation under time pressure, drill dynamic-test and biochemistry stems and calibrate against the Federation's official samples. If the gap is transfer — you know the facts but miss unseen questions — measure and close it with a second, unseen bank such as iatroX rather than re-reading explanations you have already memorised.
Editorial notes and references
Written by Dr Kolawole Tytler, NHS GP and founder of iatroX. Last checked 21 July 2026. Exam-format facts are taken from the Federation of Royal Colleges of Physicians and JRCPTB curriculum; blueprint domains are described rather than quoted as fixed weightings, because the Federation does not publish fixed per-domain percentages — treat any weighting as indicative. Any third-party question counts, prices or features referenced elsewhere in this series are vendor-reported and change without notice; verify them on the vendor's product page before relying on them. Disclosure: iatroX operates a UK question bank and therefore competes with the specialty banks named here; we have confined iatroX's role to the unseen-measurement and cross-specialty-knowledge job those specialty products do not claim to do. Corrections are welcome via the feedback route on iatrox.com.
References: Federation of Royal Colleges of Physicians — SCE in Endocrinology and Diabetes and SCE preparation and sample questions; iatroX — why a Q-bank percentage is not your exam score and the blueprint coverage matrix.
Complete a fresh SCE Endocrinology and Diabetes baseline in iatroX →