The removal of the MIR cut-off mark has been opposed by medical students, who are advocating for increased transparency.
The recent elimination of the cut-off mark for the upcoming MIR exam in 2025 has raised concerns regarding the adequacy of candidates’ training for the examination. Questions have emerged about whether future residents, who might pass the MIR by getting just one question correct without failing any others, and could secure a position if they achieve a sufficient number of correct answers, are truly qualified to enter the residency and receive specialized training. In response to this, the State Council of Medical Students (CEEM) has made a clear statement: “A doctor is made during the MIR”, and achieving a minimum grade or passing a cut-off does not qualify one as a specialist.
Laura Cortes Fraile, president of CEEM, further clarifies with her insights that one does not become a doctor merely by scoring a 10 on the medical internship test, nor is someone an ‘inferior’ doctor for scoring a 5. She emphasizes that the purpose of the test is solely to establish order. However, she believes that the elimination of the cut-off mark “could allow” students with “insufficient knowledge levels” to gain access to specialized training.
“Regardless, the only path to becoming a specialist doctor in our country is to successfully complete a four- or five-year residency. Thus, while the removal of the cut-off mark would devalue the medical profession, particularly affecting those specialties that struggle with selection, such as Family and Community Medicine, we maintain that surpassing a cut-off mark does not determine whether one is a better or worse professional, nor does it make one a specialist,” she acknowledges.
She also points out that periodic evaluations occur during the residency, and if graduates do not exceed the cut-off mark and possess “insufficient knowledge,” they will be “held to the same standards as their peers” and must, therefore, “catch up in one way or another.”
Students call for the reinstatement of the MIR cut-off mark
The CEEM itself has voiced concerns regarding the Ministry of Health’s measure to eliminate the cut-off mark, which may impact the quality of training. Consequently, medical students are demanding an official statistical analysis to evaluate the implications of this suspension of the minimum qualification.
Cortés indicated to this newspaper that the removal of the cut-off mark in the MIR 2025 constitutes a major change that necessitates thorough analysis prior to its implementation. “We believe it is essential for the Ministry of Health, Social Services, and Equality to publicly report on and conduct an official statistical analysis regarding the potential impacts of this measure. Additionally, it is vital to understand the profiles of candidates who would not meet the cut-off mark, any possible changes in the National Health System, and the number of positions that might go unfilled,” she stated.
From CEEM, they advocate for maintaining the cut-off mark “as it currently stands”, as they believe it guarantees the fundamental knowledge necessary for clinical practice. They also suggest that any significant changes to the MIR exam process should be made with “at least one year and seven months notice.” “In the event of ties during the call, we propose additional criteria, such as the number of correct and incorrect responses on the MIR exam, along with the ECOE test for ranking future residents. Furthermore, any proposed changes must undergo a dialogue period that includes both medical professionals and medical students,” she concludes.
The information published in Redacción Médica contains statements, data, and declarations from official institutions and health professionals. However, if you have any health-related questions, please consult your health specialist.
The Elimination of the MIR Cut-off Mark: A Call for Transparency from Medical Students
The elimination of the MIR cut-off mark for the upcoming MIR exam in 2025 has sparked significant debate among medical students in Spain. The State Council of Medical Students (CEEM) is voicing concerns about the implications this decision could have on the quality of training for future medical residents. As students advocate for greater transparency and analysis from the Ministry of Health, discussions continue regarding the potential impact on the medical profession.
Implications of Eliminating the Cut-off Mark
The recent proposal to abolish the cut-off mark has raised questions about the qualifications of candidates who pass the MIR exam. Students worry that future residents could theoretically pass the exam by achieving a minimum level of knowledge—potentially even as little as one correct answer—raising concerns regarding their readiness to specialize. Cortés emphasizes this point: “The doctor becomes a doctor during the MIR,” indicating that passing the test does not inherently qualify an individual as a specialist.
CEEM’s Standpoint: Protecting the Integrity of Medical Training
Laura Cortes Fraile, president of CEEM, shared her insights on how this change could affect students and the overall perception of the medical profession. “You are no longer a doctor for having a 10 on the test for medical internship,” she states, highlighting that academic scores do not define a doctor’s competence. But the removal of the cut-off mark could allow candidates with insufficient knowledge to access specialized training. This concern echoes particularly for less-popular specialties such as Family and Community Medicine, where the implications of poor preparation could be more pronounced.
Concerns Over Future Medical Standards
Critics of the cut-off mark elimination fear that the overall quality of medical training may decline. Cortés remarked that the only viable pathway to become a specialist is through successfully completing the four or five-year residency. However, the absence of a cut-off mark does not guarantee competence or proficiency within that residency. Periodic evaluations are implemented throughout residency programs, ensuring all medical professionals are continually assessed, but the question remains: will there be a gap in foundational knowledge for those who bypass the cut-off?
The Demand for Transparency and Accountability
In response to the cut-off’s removal, CEEM is urging the Ministry of Health to conduct thorough analyses to understand the potential repercussions. They are calling for an official statistical analysis that could illuminate:
- The profile of candidates who would not pass the cut-off mark
- Projected changes within the National Health System
- The number of residency positions likely to remain unfilled
According to Cortés, this decision will affect not only medical students but also the integrity of the healthcare system as a whole. “This significant change requires thorough analysis before implementation,” she remarked.
Proposing Alternatives
To secure a more comprehensive approach to the MIR exam, CEEM proposes to maintain the cut-off mark in its current form. They assert that it is a crucial measure to ensure foundational clinical knowledge—something vital for successful practical applications in healthcare.
The students are also advocating for a gradual process when implementing changes to the MIR exam guidelines, suggesting a notice period of at least one year and seven months. Additionally, in cases of score ties in the exam results, they propose utilizing further qualifying criteria, such as:
- The ratio of correct to incorrect answers
- Performance on the ECOE test
The Importance of Dialogue
CEEM insists that any significant changes regarding the MIR exam must incorporate dialogues that include input from both the medical profession and medical students. This collaboration is fundamental in maintaining the integrity and quality of medical education, ensuring that future doctors receive the necessary training required for excellence in their fields.
Case Studies: Medical Education in Action
Comparisons with Other Countries
Countries with similar medical examination processes have maintained cut-off marks to uphold educational standards. For instance, the residency selection process in countries such as the United States incorporates stringent qualifying tests like the USMLE, which mandates a minimum score to ensure candidates possess adequate knowledge and skills.
Successful Implementations of Cut-off Marks
In nations that have implemented strict cut-off marks, the following benefits have been observed:
- Higher overall quality of medical practitioners entering the workforce
- Increased public trust in medical professionals
- More comprehensive training leading to better patient outcomes
Feedback from Students: On-the-Ground Perspectives
First-hand experiences from medical students reveal a mixed landscape of preparation and concerns regarding the forthcoming updates to the MIR exam process. Many echo CEEM’s sentiments about maintaining standards for the medical profession:
- María Gonzales: “The cut-off mark gives us a benchmark to strive for. Removing it feels like setting the bar too low.”
- Pedro Alvaro: “I worry about my future patients if some doctors enter residency without adequate preparation.”
Final Thoughts: Upholding Medical Excellence
The debate surrounding the elimination of the MIR cut-off mark is ongoing, and its implications will ripple through Spain’s healthcare landscape for years to come. As students push for transparency and the ministry looks for methods to implement changes, maintaining high standards in medical training remains a priority.
As this situation evolves, it is crucial for the medical community, stakeholders, and students to work collaboratively to ensure the integrity of the medical profession and the quality of future healthcare providers.
The information above reflects discussions and opinions from medical experts and students, highlighting the need for continued dialogue and transparency in health education reforms.
