How to Study and Think like a Doctor: Studying techniques for Med School (and the after)

If you ever felt like you studied all night, and when you entered the exam, your brain was blank, and you could not even recognise the choices in the MCQ.

Welcome, this one is for you. Part 2 is the best!

If you wanna skip the reading and jump to studying, go to MedlyCase directly.

Medical School is a uniquely challenging period when we need to absorb overwhelming amounts of information in a short time. Do I even have to say this?

On top of that, we have to master skills that are unique to medical school and being a doctor, such as clinical reasoning, thinking about complex medical problems, and communicating all that to a person with 0 medical knowledge (aka patient).

On top of that, learning and studying do not stop when medical school is finished.

So, we medics need to develop the skill of studying if we want to remain good clinicians and pass exams.

Wait, what about our textbooks? Medical textbooks only look cool, but I failed every exam that I read a textbook.

Because reading does not work.

So here are techniques that work and are science-backed (check the references!)

I also added how MedlyCase can help you with those!

These two methods are the bread and butter of learning theoretical knowledge.

Studying needs to be painful to work; if you think it is too easy, you are not learning.

You need to be actively trying to remember things, and it will hurt.

But it will work.

This is a fancy way of saying quiz yourself (without prompts and hints)

Anything that pulls information out of your memory without prompts is active recall.

Most often by quizzing yourself with questions, flashcards, or practice problems instead of rereading notes.

Each retrieval attempt “rebuilds” the knowledge in your mind. Compared with just reading, highlighting, active recall is more effective for solidifying learning.

My tool of recommendation: Anki + MCQ + MedlyCase flashcards (coming soon, stay tuned)

Studying it only once does not work; studying it 15 minutes later does not work as well.

You need to forget it a bit. Then STUDY it again, just when it is not expecting.

Spaced repetition is a learning method that revisits material over progressively longer intervals, rather than cramming it in one sitting.

It is all about retrieving information while you have forgotten some of it.

For example, you learn information on day 1, then review it on day 3. You add some space in between your repetitions.

This makes recall more effortful, which deepens memory each time you retrieve it.

Some digital apps do that for you, such as Anki, making life so much easier,

If it is not in my Anki Deck, I don’t know it. Simple as that

While active recall and spaced repetition are necessary for medical school, they are not specific to our training.

We need to make sense of these symptoms and the signs to decide on a diagnosis and management plan.

I broke down each skill and the technique to develop it. Your university is probably using some of the techniques.

And this is where MedlyCase can help you!

Clinical reasoning is connecting the clues to reach a clinical decision, request tests, and give treatment.

Case-based learning (CBL) uses small-group discussions around realistic patient cases.

You need to apply prior knowledge, connect dots, fill gaps, and practice clinical reasoning.

It aims to get you to connect the symptoms with the signs, to ask for further questions, and consider the alarm features.

Also, it focuses on building the skill of thinking in differential diagnosis - what else could be going on here?

Learning from cases is the best way to pull information together. Hands down.

Not to mention that it prepares us for our future as clinicians.

It boosts remembering as well because it is tied to a real patient scenario.

Doing any cases on your own can facilitate this process as well. There are many cases in Case Files (email me, and I will send it to you) and MedlyCase, we have over 40+ cases designed to boost this clinical reasoning

Problem-based learning (PBL) starts with a complex clinical problem and lets students lead the learning. You are in charge.

You identify what you need to know, research it, and return to solve the case together. It builds self-directed learning and critical thinking.

My med school liked to torture us with rare cases, and we needed to figure out which tests to order first.

Don’t worry, we don’t do that in MedlyCase.

But here is what we do:

I have designed a Deep Learning Guide that walks you through symptoms and breaks down every clinical step you need to take if you face a patient with a certain symptom.

Cannot think of the differentials of asthma, don’t worry, I got you. It lists them all + the alarm features you can use to impress your attending.

Email to get yours at [email protected]

While this might not entirely be PBL, it can help you have an idea of what is the order of things we do in the clinic.

And use in the PBL in your uni 😏

Simulation-based learning (SBL) recreates clinical scenarios using mannequins, standardized patients, or virtual tools (hey, that’s us!).

You practice skills safely, get immediate feedback, and learn through debriefing.

The examination version is also known as the OSCE exams and PLAB Step 2.

You develop soft skills like professionalism, communication, and breaking down bad/good news to patients while demonstrating clinical skills and reasoning.

I live and breathe this technique.

I owe my degree to this.

This is the method we laid MedlyCase on! This teaching technique has been proven time and time again to give the best outcomes for students, to be more effective, to increase MCQ performance and overall confidence.

We have 40+ cases that you need to manage from A to Z, put in diagnoses, review tests, give treatment, all in a no-pressure environment, all the while maintaining soft skills!

Wow, if you haven’t already burnt your textbooks here are some statistics on why you should.

A 2024 network meta-analysis of 80 randomized controlled trials (6,180 students) found that, compared to LBL, CBL (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 1.19; 95% CI 0.49–1.90), PBL (SMD = 3.37; 95% CI 1.23–5.51), and SBL (SMD = 2.64; 95% CI 1.28–4.00) all produced large, statistically significant improvements in theoretical test scores, practical test scores, and student satisfaction (crazy). SBL had the highest probability of being the most effective for overall learning experience (SUCRA = 96.2%), while CBL and PBL were most effective for clinical curricula (SUCRA = 97.7% and 60.3%, respectively).

Meta-analyses of CBL and PBL combined versus LBL in clinical education show that CBL-PBL improves theoretical exam scores (SMD = 2.16; 95% CI 1.22–3.11), practical skills (SMD = 1.59; 95% CI 1.04–2.15), and learning satisfaction (effect size = 0.86; 95% CI 0.81–0.91), with a particularly strong effect on clinical thinking skills (SMD = 3.66; 95% CI 1.75–5.57).

I already burned my textbook.

SBL, when integrated into curricula, leads to statistically significant improvements in written, clinical, and continuous assessment scores (p < 0.001), as well as enhanced communication and reflective capacity

(suddenly you are better at communicating how much smarter you are.

Simulation teaching also improves multiple-choice exam performance (MD = 0.33; 95% CI 0.18–0.48) compared to traditional methods. (damn)

In summary, CBL, PBL, and SBL each produce large, statistically significant improvements in knowledge acquisition, clinical skills, and student satisfaction compared to LBL, with SBL offering the most engaging learning experience and CBL/PBL excelling in clinical reasoning and comprehensive competencies.

*SUCRA (Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking curve) is a statistical measure used in network meta-analyses to quantify and rank the probability that each educational intervention (such as case-based learning, problem-based learning, or simulation-based learning) is the most effective among all those compared.

A SUCRA value of 100% indicates that an intervention is certain to be the best, while 0% means it is certain to be the worst. In the context of comparing teaching strategies in medical education, higher SUCRA values for a method (e.g., SBL SUCRA = 96.2%, CBL SUCRA = 89.4%, PBL SUCRA = 93.3%) indicate a greater likelihood that the method is among the most effective for improving outcomes such as test scores and student satisfaction, relative to other methods analyzed in the network meta-analysis