A ten-year retrospective analysis of medical school rankings in the United Kingdom

National rankings are employed by higher education (HE) institutions to guide strategic decisions and by prospective applicants and their supporters to guide decisions about where to study. Given the increased marketisation of HE and the use of rankings in decision making, it is essential to understand the nuances of rankings: how different systems lead to different rankings, the correlation between rankings of high-profile programmes such as medicine and that of their institutions, and how rankings shift over time. To date, no studies have assessed agreement between ranking systems for medical programmes in the United Kingdom (UK). Given that various ranking systems are used globally to compare institutions within and across countries, a deeper understanding of these ranking systems is crucial. Retrospective data across a ten-year period (2016–2025) were obtained on the national rankings of medicine programmes in the UK: the Complete University Guide, Guardian, and The Times. The data were analysed to investigate agreement in ranking of medical programmes over time and the agreement between overall ranking of an institution and the ranking of its medical programme. Ranking systems showed a high level of agreement with each other. However, mean scores over the ten-year period varied by ranking system, whereby institutions occupying the ‘top three’ positions were not wholly consistent across systems. Associations between institutional rank and that of institutions’ medicine programmes were statistically significant (r = 0.36–0.38, p < 0.01). Agreement between ranking systems for medical programmes in the UK is present, yet there remains notable variation for some institutions within those ranking systems, likely due to different components and weightings that make up these scores. The weak association between overall rank and medical ranks implies that the presence of a medical school at an institution does not guarantee a high overall rank – higher universities can have lower medical schools, and vice versa. This suggests that prospective students should consider an array of factors when deciding on where to study; not rankings alone.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Medical Education
Published
2026-01-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-08538-0
Primary Topic
Medical Education and Admissions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A ten-year retrospective analysis of medical school rankings in the United Kingdom

Owen W. Tomlinson, James A. Butler
BMC Medical Education
Medical Education and Admissions
article

A ten-year retrospective analysis of medical school rankings in the United Kingdom

Owen W. Tomlinson, James A. Butler
article en

Abstract

National rankings are employed by higher education (HE) institutions to guide strategic decisions and by prospective applicants and their supporters to guide decisions about where to study. Given the increased marketisation of HE and the use of rankings in decision making, it is essential to understand the nuances of rankings: how different systems lead to different rankings, the correlation between rankings of high-profile programmes such as medicine and that of their institutions, and how rankings shift over time. To date, no studies have assessed agreement between ranking systems for medical programmes in the United Kingdom (UK). Given that various ranking systems are used globally to compare institutions within and across countries, a deeper understanding of these ranking systems is crucial. Retrospective data across a ten-year period (2016–2025) were obtained on the national rankings of medicine programmes in the UK: the Complete University Guide, Guardian, and The Times. The data were analysed to investigate agreement in ranking of medical programmes over time and the agreement between overall ranking of an institution and the ranking of its medical programme. Ranking systems showed a high level of agreement with each other. However, mean scores over the ten-year period varied by ranking system, whereby institutions occupying the ‘top three’ positions were not wholly consistent across systems. Associations between institutional rank and that of institutions’ medicine programmes were statistically significant (r = 0.36–0.38, p < 0.01). Agreement between ranking systems for medical programmes in the UK is present, yet there remains notable variation for some institutions within those ranking systems, likely due to different components and weightings that make up these scores. The weak association between overall rank and medical ranks implies that the presence of a medical school at an institution does not guarantee a high overall rank – higher universities can have lower medical schools, and vice versa. This suggests that prospective students should consider an array of factors when deciding on where to study; not rankings alone.

BMC Medical EducationVol. 26(1)
University of Exeter (GB)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 83%
Medical Education and Admissions
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.