EDAIC 2027 Question Bank and Mock Exam Plan

Last checked: 30 July 2026

ESAIC has not yet published the official EDAIC Part 1 2027 timetable. You can still build a question-bank and mock-exam plan now because the underlying skills—precise MTF decisions, retrieval, broad coverage, pacing and error review—need months rather than a last-minute sprint.

The plan below moves from diagnostic sets to targeted learning, cumulative mixed practice and realistic mocks. It does not prescribe a “guaranteed” question count or pass percentage. ESAIC's current Diploma Guide explains that the Part I pass mark can vary with paper standard and reference questions; a commercial platform cannot convert one practice score into an official result.

AnesCORE is an independent preparation platform and is not affiliated with or endorsed by ESAIC.

Understand what the bank is training

Under the current framework, Part I contains two multiple true/false papers:

Paper A focuses on basic sciences.
Paper B covers clinical anaesthesia, intensive care and related areas.

Each stem has five statements that must be considered individually. The current Part I page states that correct responses receive credit and there is no negative marking, but the live 2027 regulations must be checked when published.

A useful question bank trains four different things:

Knowledge: can you identify the governing fact or principle?
Discrimination: can you notice the qualifier that changes a statement?
Retrieval: can you produce the concept without a chapter heading?
Process: can you make independent decisions consistently across a long set?

The MTF strategy guide explains the basic mechanics. Avoid “always false” word tricks; medical statements require content reasoning.

Phase 1: establish an honest diagnostic

Complete a small mixed set before an intensive revision block. Use fresh questions and ordinary conditions. Do not look up answers during the set.

Record for every statement:

answer selected;
confidence: high, medium or low;
correct or incorrect;
domain and subtopic;
error cause;
next action.

An incorrect high-confidence answer is especially important because it reveals a stable misconception. A correct low-confidence answer may be a guess that needs review.

Do not publish the score or compare it with strangers. A short diagnostic samples only part of the syllabus and is not a readiness assessment.

Try 10 EDAIC questions free — no card required — through AnesCORE registration. Use the explanations to build the first weak-topic list.

Build a useful error taxonomy

“Wrong” is not a diagnosis. Use categories:

knowledge absent: the concept was genuinely unknown;
knowledge confused: two related concepts were reversed;
condition missed: the answer changes with a population, time, dose or context;
wording misread: a qualifier was overlooked;
calculation process: the method or units failed;
memory unavailable: the fact was studied but could not be retrieved;
unsupported change: the initial reasoned answer was changed without new evidence;
fatigue or pace: attention deteriorated.

Assign the smallest repair that fits. A missing mechanism may need a textbook section. A wording error may need slow statement annotation. A memory failure needs retrieval and spacing. A repeated calculation error needs worked practice.

The question-bank workflow guide offers a detailed review template.

Phase 2: targeted learning sets

Use focused sets after studying a bounded topic. The purpose is to connect the source with precise decisions, not to create a flattering score.

A complete session:

define the concept to learn;
study one appropriate source;
close it and retrieve the explanation;
answer a short targeted set;
review every statement;
write concise repairs;
schedule a delayed mixed revisit.

Targeted accuracy often rises quickly because the context tells you what to retrieve. Do not mistake this for durable examination readiness.

Protect both papers from the beginning. If Paper A is comfortable, schedule Paper B deliberately; if clinical material feels familiar, do not neglect physiology, pharmacology, physics, measurement and statistics.

Use the Part I syllabus breakdown to ensure the question categories actually map to the official scope.

Phase 3: cumulative mixed practice

After several topic blocks, mix current and older material. Retrieval becomes more effortful because the question no longer arrives with a topic label. That effort is valuable.

Build sets from:

this week's new topics;
previous weak topics;
stable topics due for review;
a small amount of unfamiliar material;
both Paper A and Paper B at planned intervals.

Spacing matters. Returning after a delay tests whether knowledge remained available. Retrieval practice has evidence for improving long-term retention, and ESAIC's own preparation article recommends active recall, spaced repetition and interleaving.

Do not simply repeat the exact same questions until they are memorised. Use fresh or differently worded material to test the underlying relationship.

The spaced-repetition guide can help schedule returns without creating an unmanageable queue.

How to review a five-statement MTF item

Treat the stem as context, then process A–E separately.

For each statement:

restate it in plain language;
identify its decisive qualifier;
retrieve the relevant principle;
decide true or false;
state why;
after submission, compare your reason with the explanation and source.

If an explanation says only “false” without explaining the condition, it is poor learning support. If a statement concerns current guidance, verify it against the authoritative source.

Never use recalled or leaked EDAIC content. It may breach confidentiality, be inaccurate and distort learning towards fragments rather than the published domain.

Phase 4: timed blocks

Timing enters after enough knowledge and process exist. Start with a moderate block and observe:

average pace;
time lost rereading;
late-set attention;
frequency of unsupported answer changes;
unanswered statements;
performance by quarter of the set.

Use the official timing and delivery rules for your 2027 centre once ESAIC publishes them. The current guide describes paper and computer delivery differently, so a copied older duration may be wrong for your sitting.

Do not review answers during the timed block unless the official interface and your strategy permit it. Separate performance from learning: sit first, then conduct a full review.

The Part I marking guide explains the current principles, but the live regulations remain authoritative.

Phase 5: the first mock

A mock should test more than knowledge. It tests setup, timing, endurance and recovery from uncertainty.

Before the mock:

choose fresh content;
match the confirmed paper scope;
use the official time for the relevant format;
remove notes and interruptions;
prepare the physical or digital environment;
define how results will be analysed.

After the mock, do not open another mock immediately. Produce a report:

Dimension	Evidence	Next action
Paper balance	domain results	rebalance study
Knowledge	missing concepts	focused source
Retrieval	known but unavailable	spaced prompts
Wording	qualifiers missed	statement annotation
Pace	incomplete/rushed	controlled timed set
Fatigue	late decline	longer practice block
Confidence	guesses/misconceptions	calibration review

Read the EDAIC mock-exam guide before planning the next cycle.

What a mock score can and cannot tell you

A score can compare your performance with:

your earlier result on equally fresh material;
your own domain distribution;
your confidence calibration;
your pace under similar conditions.

It cannot, by itself:

reproduce ESAIC's standard-setting process;
prove that the mock has the same difficulty as the live paper;
guarantee a pass;
show coverage if the question sample is narrow;
remove uncertainty from a small sample.

Avoid a universal “safe percentage” quoted without validation. Seek stable breadth across fresh mixed sets, understanding of errors and consistent completion under the current rules.

Phase 6: targeted repair between mocks

The period between mocks creates improvement.

Select:

two recurring weak domains;
one process error;
one older topic showing decay.

For each domain, use a focused learning cycle and then retest on fresh mixed material. For the process error, create a specific exercise. For example, if qualifiers are missed, underline or verbalise them during untimed practice before returning to normal conditions.

Do not rewrite every explanation into a large notebook. Keep only notes that change a future decision:

the misunderstood relationship;
why the wrong answer was tempting;
the correct condition;
when to retest.

A relative 2027 schedule

Because the date is unannounced, use exam-minus phases.

Early preparation

diagnostic set;
syllabus mapping;
targeted foundation questions;
slow complete reviews;
error taxonomy.

Middle preparation

increasing mixed sets;
spaced returns;
Paper A/Paper B balance;
periodic fresh progress checks;
first controlled timing.

Final third

realistic timed blocks;
full mocks at sensible intervals;
mock reports;
repeated-weakness repair;
current guideline checks.

Final weeks

fewer new resources;
mixed retrieval;
selected fresh questions;
realistic final mock with time to repair;
taper rather than uncontrolled volume.

The Part I study-plan guide can help map these phases once the date appears.

How many questions should you do?

Use review capacity as the limiting factor. A smaller set with complete analysis can be more valuable than a large set rushed after a clinical shift.

Choose a daily or weekly range based on:

available focused time;
current phase;
explanation depth;
number of errors requiring source review;
need for spaced return;
mock schedule.

Increase volume only if review quality stays intact. The questions-per-day guide provides a method without claiming one universal target.

How to evaluate a question bank

Before paying, examine:

explicit syllabus mapping;
authentic MTF structure;
separate decisions for five statements;
explanation quality;
references and update policy;
weak-topic analytics;
ability to create mixed and timed sets;
mock design;
trial access;
expiry, renewal and refund terms;
privacy and account security;
absence of pass guarantees.

Question count alone is weak evidence. Thousands of poorly explained or duplicated statements can create activity without learning.

Compare AnesCORE plan options only after using the free sample and defining what job the platform must perform.

A weekly practice review

At the end of each week, answer:

Which domain improved on fresh questions?
Which error repeated?
Which older topic decayed?
Was Paper A/Paper B balance appropriate?
Did volume exceed review capacity?
Which one change will next week test?

Keep the review to one page. The purpose is to alter behaviour, not create an archive.

Common practice mistakes

Chasing completion

Finishing a bank is not the examination objective. Understanding, retrieval and breadth matter more than a progress bar.

Repeating remembered items

A higher score can reflect item memory. Use delayed and fresh material to test transfer.

Reviewing only wrong answers

Correct low-confidence guesses and correct answers based on faulty reasoning also need review.

Taking mocks too frequently

Mocks consume fresh content and produce little improvement without repair cycles.

Ignoring one paper

The current guide says both papers must be passed. Protect broad preparation.

Believing a guaranteed threshold

Independent percentages do not equal ESAIC's pass mark.

A quality check for every mock

Before accepting a mock as evidence, inspect the assessment itself. It should state which paper and domains it samples, use five independent true/false statements per stem, provide complete explanations and avoid presenting recalled live-exam content. The questions should be fresh to you and broad enough for the conclusion you want to draw.

Afterwards, separate three findings. The first is content evidence: which concepts were or were not available. The second is process evidence: whether timing, reading or fatigue affected decisions. The third is assessment uncertainty: whether a small or uneven sample limits interpretation.

Keep mock reports comparable. Use the same confidence categories and error taxonomy, even when different resources are used. If scores rise while high-confidence misconceptions and unreviewed topics remain, do not declare the plan complete. If one mock is markedly easier, record that possibility instead of attributing the entire change to learning.

Finally, protect fresh mocks. Do not open answer keys, browse stems in advance or repeat the same paper as a readiness test. Once content is remembered, it may still support review, but it no longer provides an honest independent measure.

Frequently asked questions

When should I start an EDAIC question bank?

Early enough that questions can direct learning. Begin with a small diagnostic and carefully reviewed targeted sets.

Should I complete the syllabus before mixed questions?

No. Introduce cumulative mixing as topics are established, while continuing coverage.

How often should I take a mock?

Only often enough to leave time for analysis and repair. The exact interval depends on your phase and access to fresh, representative material.

What practice percentage guarantees a pass?

None. A commercial platform cannot reproduce ESAIC standard setting or guarantee an outcome.

Should I answer every statement?

The current Part I page says there is no negative marking and candidates should answer all questions. Confirm the 2027 regulations.

Is AnesCORE an official ESAIC question bank?

No. AnesCORE is independent and is not affiliated with or endorsed by ESAIC.

Sources and official links

Use questions to decide what to learn next. Explore the full EDAIC Part 1 hub or try 10 EDAIC questions free — no card required.