Skip to content
MSRAbankby The Interview Bank

MSRA · PD ranking

MSRA Professional Dilemmas ranking: judging actions

The ranking section asks you to judge four or five independent actions, not arrange a timeline. Compare immediate safety, honesty, the F2 role and proportionality instead of memorising 'always escalate' rules.

95-minute PD paper4–5 independent actionsNear-miss marking

Free resource · The Interview Bank

Share this resource

The ranking section asks you to judge four or five independent actions, not arrange a timeline. Compare immediate safety, honesty, the F2 role and proportionality instead of memorising 'always escalate' rules.

Define the real concern

Identify whose safety, dignity or professional responsibility is at stake and whether any immediate danger is described.

  • Assume the F2 perspective unless told otherwise.
  • Distinguish urgency from something requiring routine clarification.
  • Do not invent extra details to justify a preferred response.

Judge actions independently

The official instructions say options are discrete alternatives, not steps of a sequence.

  • Is it honest, respectful, safe and within competence?
  • Does it address the problem or merely pass it elsewhere?
  • Is the seniority of the recipient proportionate to the risk?

Resolve difficult middle choices

Some reasonable options serve different aims, so compare them pairwise.

  • Consider whether direct clarification adds more value than escalation.
  • Compare benefits and potential harm for each proposed action.
  • Official near-miss scoring rewards responses closer to an expert-determined order.

In depth

Apply the ideas to your preparation

Section 01

Read the question, not a memorised formula

First identify the actual concern: is someone currently at risk, does a record need correcting, or is a colleague seeking support? An F2 must work within competence and protect patients.

GMC Good medical practice emphasises honesty, safety, respect and being open when things go wrong. These principles help inform judgement but are not the hidden MSRA answer key.

Immediate safety risks require prompt action and suitable support; uncertainty without acute danger may justify clarification before formal escalation.

Section 02

Ranking is not a plan

The official instructions explicitly describe each option as an independent action. Do not tell yourself that a weak action is acceptable because you would complete a safer one immediately afterwards.

Make provisional top and bottom choices, then compare adjacent middle options. Evaluate scope, risk, timeliness and whether a direct helpful conversation is possible.

If two actions both appear plausible, compare their incremental value rather than inventing a missing clinical emergency or imagining a sequence of events.

Section 03

Use near-miss scoring appropriately

The official scoring compares each order with a predetermined subject-matter-expert key. Closer rankings score better; leave no answer blank because the paper has no negative marking.

When reviewing practice, explain why your second and third choices differed. Learn how the facts change proportionality instead of memorising fixed positions for 'speak to colleague' or 'tell consultant'.

An invented teaching scenario is not psychometrically calibrated. It should improve your reasoning, not claim to reproduce the official concordance process.

Section 04

Balance safety, kindness and escalation

Empathy should not lead to concealment of a genuine risk or inaccurate records. Equally, an aggressive public accusation is rarely an appropriate first response to a minor misunderstanding.

Evaluate the evidence and the F2's responsibilities. The correct level of escalation depends on urgency, repeated behaviour and the availability of safe direct action.

Original teaching exercise

Original comparison: who may sign a clinical note?

As an F2, you are asked to sign a ward-round entry written under your name by a colleague. You did not attend that part of the round. There is no stated immediate patient deterioration. Judge each response on its own.

  1. AExplain you cannot attest to a conversation you did not witness; ask the colleague to enter their own accurate note.
  2. BOffer to document only observations you personally made, with accurate authorship and timing.
  3. CAsk the supervising registrar for advice about documentation responsibility if the issue remains unresolved.
  4. DSign because the colleague assures you the entry is correct and everyone is busy.
  5. ERewrite it to imply you attended, then sign to avoid slowing the ward round.

Worked reasoning

  1. A and B directly support accurate records. They do not presume that your colleague acted maliciously.
  2. C can be reasonable if uncertainty persists; requesting senior input is not automatically superior to an effective direct solution.
  3. D asks you to attest to something not verified; E introduces an affirmative misrepresentation.
  4. Try a full order yourself and justify each adjacent choice. This teaching analysis intentionally does not claim a validated official ordering.

Accurate documentation and proportionate assistance matter more than agreement or dramatic escalation.

Original, uncalibrated teaching scenario; it has no official MSRA scoring key.

Preparation

How to practise deliberately

  1. Identify the core professional concern before choosing.
  2. Judge each option as if it were the only action taken.
  3. Choose provisional top and bottom actions.
  4. Compare defensible middle choices pairwise.
  5. Calibrate using the official practice paper and rationales.

Common mistakes

What to avoid

  • Treating responses as a chronological plan.
  • Always favouring maximum escalation.
  • Ignoring safety out of misplaced collegiality.
  • Adding facts that are absent from the stem.
  • Treating an independent tutor answer as an official key.

Free Mini MSRA Bank

Put this guide into practice.

240 CPS questions and 50 PD scenarios with explanations. A free account is required.

Try 290 free MSRA questionsExplore the Full MSRA Bank

Full MSRA Bank — £29 once for four calendar months from purchase; no automatic renewal.

Official source

NHS England — Professional Dilemmas paper

Last checked 12 October 2026. Official NHS England guidance remains the source of truth.

Further reading

Check primary sources for changes to exam arrangements, recruitment and professional standards.

Explore the MSRA guides

Read next

MSRA Professional Dilemmas Select-Three Guide

Select-three assesses the combination of actions rather than whether three sentences sound individually appropriate. A strong combination addresses distinct needs without losing patient safety or proportionality.

Read The MSRA Bank guide →

MSRA Professional Dilemmas Guide

The PD paper is a Situational Judgement Test. It assesses how you believe an F2 doctor should behave in challenging professional situations rather than testing factual medical knowledge.

Read The MSRA Bank guide →

MSRA Revision Plan: 4, 8 and 12 Weeks

Build a timetable around your current knowledge, rota and reliable study hours. These routes develop both papers with spaced review and time-limited practice, rather than prescribing an unrealistic number of questions.

Read The MSRA Bank guide →