Table of Contents
- The Shocking New Rule for NEET PG
- Why Did NBEMS Lower the Bar?
- NEET PG and the Crisis of Vacant Seats
- Medical Bodies Sound the Alarm
- What Does “Negative Marks” Really Mean?
- Global Comparisons: How Do Other Countries Handle PG Admissions?
- What Students and Patients Should Know
- Conclusion: Balancing Access and Excellence
- Sources
The Shocking New Rule for NEET PG
Imagine scoring negative marks on a national exam—and still being allowed to pursue a postgraduate medical degree. That’s no longer hypothetical in India. The National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) has officially scrapped the minimum qualifying threshold for NEET PG 2025, effectively implementing a “zero cut-off” policy .
This means any candidate who appeared for the exam—regardless of how poorly they performed—can now register for counselling and vie for one of the more than 9,000 vacant postgraduate medical seats across the country . While the move aims to address chronic understaffing in hospitals, it has ignited a fierce debate: is India lowering its medical standards to keep beds filled?
Why Did NBEMS Lower the Bar?
According to NBEMS officials, the decision stems from a persistent problem: thousands of PG seats remain unfilled year after year, especially in non-clinical and less popular specialties like anatomy, physiology, and community medicine . In rural and remote government hospitals, the shortage of specialist doctors is so acute that basic healthcare services are compromised.
The board argues that by allowing all candidates into the counselling pool, they can maximize seat utilization and ensure that even the least sought-after departments get trained personnel. “It’s about service delivery,” an official told Times of India, emphasizing the need to staff public health infrastructure .
NEET PG and the Crisis of Vacant Seats
The numbers tell a troubling story. Despite over 60,000 candidates appearing for NEET PG annually, nearly 15% of the 67,000+ total PG seats go unclaimed each year . Reasons include:
- Geographic bias: Candidates prefer metro cities over rural postings.
- Specialty preference: High demand for surgery, radiology, and dermatology; low interest in pre-clinical subjects.
- Infrastructure gaps: Many peripheral medical colleges lack adequate teaching facilities or stipends.
Instead of fixing these systemic issues, critics argue, the government is taking a shortcut—diluting entry standards rather than making PG programs more attractive or equitable.
Medical Bodies Sound the Alarm
Leading medical associations have reacted with alarm. The Indian Medical Association (IMA) and the Federation of Medical Colleges of India (FMCI) warn that admitting candidates with minimal or negative competence could have dire consequences.
“Postgraduate training is not just about filling seats—it’s about producing specialists who can diagnose, treat, and save lives,” said Dr. Ravi Wankhedkar, former IMA president . “Lowering the bar risks patient safety and erodes public trust in the entire healthcare system.”
They fear a two-tier system may emerge: elite institutions maintaining high standards while others graduate underqualified doctors—a scenario that could widen urban-rural health disparities.
What Does “Negative Marks” Really Mean?
NEET PG uses a negative marking scheme: +4 for each correct answer, –1 for each incorrect one. A candidate who guesses wildly without knowledge can easily end up with a net negative score. For example, answering 100 questions incorrectly yields –100 marks.
Allowing such candidates into PG programmes raises serious questions about foundational knowledge. Can someone who demonstrates less than random-chance performance be trusted to interpret ECGs, manage ICU cases, or perform surgeries after just three years of training? Experts say the risk is real—and unacceptable.
Global Comparisons: How Do Other Countries Handle PG Admissions?
India’s approach stands in stark contrast to global norms. In the United States, the USMLE Step exams have strict passing thresholds, and residency programs use holistic but rigorous selection criteria. The UK’s MRCP and other specialty exams also enforce minimum competency levels before trainees can progress .
Even countries with doctor shortages, like South Africa or Brazil, maintain qualifying cut-offs while addressing vacancies through incentives—not by lowering academic bars. This highlights a critical gap in India’s strategy: it’s prioritizing quantity over quality, with potentially long-term costs.
What Students and Patients Should Know
If you’re a medical student:
- Don’t assume a PG seat guarantees quality training—research your college’s faculty, case load, and pass rates.
- Advocate for systemic reforms instead of accepting diluted standards.
If you’re a patient:
- Be aware that your treating resident may have entered PG with minimal exam performance.
- Always seek second opinions for complex diagnoses, especially in non-metro hospitals.
For deeper insights, explore our guide on [INTERNAL_LINK:choosing-the-right-medical-college-in-india].
Conclusion: Balancing Access and Excellence
The zero cut-off policy for NEET PG reflects a well-intentioned but dangerously flawed solution to a real problem. While filling hospital vacancies is urgent, compromising on the competence of future specialists is not the answer. Sustainable fixes—like better rural incentives, improved working conditions, and curriculum reform—are needed. Until then, this policy risks trading short-term staffing gains for long-term erosion of India’s medical education standards and patient outcomes.
Sources
- [1] Times of India: Zero cut-off in NEET PG: Is India lowering the bar to keep hospitals running?
- [2] NBEMS Official Website: https://natboard.edu.in/
- [3] Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Government of India – PG Seat Data 2024
- [4] Indian Medical Association (IMA) Public Statements
- [5] National Medical Commission (NMC) Guidelines on PG Education
- [6] World Federation for Medical Education (WFME) Standards: https://wfme.org/