Editorial policy

For every UK medical and dental school we list: A-Level entry requirements, UCAT score thresholds (home and international), interview format, interview window, decision dates, and the official course page. For each school we also publish a long-form "How to get into [School]" guide and a FAQ with the questions applicants most often ask us.

School data is sourced from the official course pages, the UCAS application portal, and direct conversations with current students and admissions tutors. UCAT score ranges are quoted from public mean-offer-holder data published by individual schools. We update entry requirements and interview format every year before the UCAS cycle opens.

Isaac Butler-King, Co-founder, NextGen MedPrep, medical student at the University of Glasgow, reviews every school page before publication and during the annual update cycle. Specific factual contributions are credited inline where appropriate.

US-focused pages (MD and DO schools, the MCAT, secondary essays, CASPer and the wider US application strategy) are reviewed by the NextGenMedPrep Admissions Team — our us medical & dental admissions editorial team. The same accuracy checks and annual update cycle apply.

Every school detail page and how-to-get-in guide carries a Last reviewed footer. That date reflects the most recent commit that changed the underlying school data - not the build/deploy date - so a date that hasn't moved means nothing about that school has changed.

Not every school record has been checked to the same depth, and each school page tells you which applies. School pages and how-to-get-in guides carry a verification sentence saying whether the record was checked field by field against the school's official course page, reconciled with that page, had a single field corrected, was compiled from the school's published material and checked only for internal consistency, or could not be re-checked because the official page could not be reached. Where a record has not been re-checked against source, the page says so and asks you to confirm the figures with the school before relying on them.

Our course pages publish only what a named source actually states; if a school's page does not state something, we leave it out. Each course page names its primary source and the date it was checked, and says whether the school's own course page was read directly or — where our tooling could not read it — whether the profile was built from the university's other published course and school pages.

The Where to Apply strategy generator is a shortlisting model, not a decision. Its UCAT thresholds come from NGMP TrueScore, our prediction of the UCAT score each school needs for an interview invitation, built from multi-year Freedom of Information data; where a school publishes no usable tier, the tool falls back to its stated minimum and says so. Its other rules are read from each school's published admissions guidance, and thresholds, policies and rates are refreshed when each cycle's data lands. Every verdict names the rule that produced it. Always confirm against each school's current admissions page before you submit.

Articles on our interview reading path cite primary sources — bodies such as the GMC, the BMA, NICE, NHS England and the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, and UK legislation — listed at the end of each article, which also shows the date it was last updated.

Our interview question bank is compiled by NextGen MedPrep. Each question comes with follow-up questions and tips, and many link to the official bodies behind the topic, such as NHS Health Careers, the Medical Schools Council, the GMC and the GDC. Questions reflect the kinds of question asked at medical and dental school interviews; they are practice material, not a record of any school's actual interview.

Some blog posts are drafted by an AI language model. The model researches using web search restricted to a list of permitted sources, a second AI pass critiques and can send the draft back for rewriting, and figures about named schools are checked automatically against our own school dataset. AI-drafted posts are only ever saved as drafts: nothing is published automatically, and a member of our team has to publish each post. Every published post lists the sources it draws on at the end of the article.

Weekly newsletter issues are drafted by an AI language model instructed to ground every factual claim in official, peer-reviewed or other high-authority sources, and each section lists its sources. An issue can be sent by a member of our team after reviewing it; when automatic weekly sending is switched on, an issue can also be generated and sent without a person reviewing it first.

Feedback in our AI tools — the AI mock interviewer, AI OSCE stations and AI feedback on personal statement paragraphs — is generated by AI models (Anthropic's Claude) and is not checked by a person before you see it. In AI OSCE stations the model judges each mark-scheme item, while totals, percentages, critical fails and bands are calculated by our own code rather than by the model. If you think an AI mock interview scored you unfairly or got something wrong, you can flag it from your debrief and an NGMP coach will re-review it within 48 hours.

We also use AI tools to help draft and edit some of our other content, including reading-path articles and practice questions.

Found an error? Email contact@nextgenmedprep.com - we read every correction request and update the affected page within 7 days.