This is what we hand back after ten minutes.

You gave your name and your role in the first line. You never confirmed who you were speaking to. The anchor scores both together, so doing one of the two is partial credit.

All four. Site and character came out of your open question, which is the efficient way to get them. You then asked directly about radiation and she told you about the left arm and the jaw. Full credit needs all four, and you have them.

You asked for a number and she gave you six out of ten. Worth noting what this criterion will not accept: asking whether it was bad, and being told it was quite bad, earns nothing here. The scale is the criterion.

Nothing about palpitations or an irregular heartbeat anywhere in the ten minutes. This station does not expect a full palpitations workup, and the scheme says so: one screening question inside your associated symptoms would have taken the whole mark.

Cough, blood in the sputum and frothy sputum were not asked about. She would have said no to all three, and that negative is exactly what you needed for your presentation. This is most of why your systemic review came out at 17%.

You asked, and she told you she gave up eight years ago. You did not quantify it. Twenty a day for twenty-five years was one question away, and in a chest pain history the number is the point. Status asked but not quantified is partial credit.

She mentioned her mother and you followed it: what happened, and at what age. A cue raised and left alone is partial credit here. You also correctly did not treat a heart attack at 70 as a premature family history, which it is not.

Three differentials, which is a reasonable range, and stable angina was properly argued from the exertional onset and the relief with rest. Acute coronary syndrome and musculoskeletal pain were named and then left standing on their own. Thin justification across most of the list is partial credit, and this criterion is usually what separates a pass from a distinction.