The government has taken an initiative to improve the MBBS admission process in the country to eradicate the academic dishonesty and encourage the deserving candidates for MBBS enrolment. The Supreme Court has paved the way to hold the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET), a common entrance test for admission to undergraduate and postgraduate medical courses, from the 2016-17 academic year onwards. This paper aims to focus on the contention raised by various stakeholders associated with it and examines the pass percentage of plus two State Board examinations in 2015, 2016 and 2017 and admission details for 2016 and 2017.,The researchers adopted exploratory research. The researchers studied the medical admission process at national and global levels. They collected data of MBBS admission, NEET, State Board and CBSE plus two results and information from newspapers, website and magazine articles. Many experts published articles in newspapers. No study analysed data and made an exhaustive exploratory study. This motivates the researcher to do the same. Simple percentage, percentage change, correlation analysis and the sign test are used to determine whether the State Board or CBSE students get benefitted out of NEET to become medical professionals.,There is no significant relationship between MBBS enrolment of students (both State Board and CBSE students) before and after the NEET was introduced. From correlation analysis, it is inferred that the pass percentage of students who studied under State Board and MBBS enrolment were lesser in 2017 than 2016. It is also inferred that many districts students’ enrolment in MBBS course have increased from 2016 to 2017. The researchers concluded that because of NEET, CBSE students got more enrolment in MBBS course in 2017 compared with State Board students in 2016.,The researchers found that the students with State Board examinations enrolled in lesser number for MBBS course than CBSE students in Tamil Nadu. There is a scope for improvement in designing and implementing NEET with the deliberations among different stakeholders involved with the medical education system, which will help in reducing the rampant corruption and, most importantly, pave the way for a selection based on merit in medical education. Possibly, this will also work as a safeguard to the sanctity of the medical profession in India and at the global level.,The researcher collected data from newspapers, websites and journals. Many experts discuss about, for and against NEET. No one analysed the data. This is a unique article that has more statistical analysis and meaningful interpretations from analysis. This paper will be useful to the government at national and global levels to frame medical admission procedure and policies.

中文翻译：

---

NEET医务人员：质量保证？探索性研究

政府已经采取改进MBBS招生过程中在全国根除学术造假和鼓励MBBS招生的合格候选人的倡议。最高法院已为从2016-17学年开始的全国资格暨入学考试（NEET）铺平了道路，这是入学本科和研究生医学课程的通用入学考试。本文旨在关注与之相关的各种利益相关者提出的争论，并研究了2015年，2016年和2017年两次国务院考试的及格率以及2016年和2017年的录取细节。研究人员采用探索性研究。研究人员在国家和全球范围内研究了入院过程。他们收集了MBBS录取，NEET，国务院和牛熊证加上来自报纸，网站和杂志文章的两项结果和信息。许多专家在报纸上发表文章。没有研究分析数据并进行了详尽的探索性研究。这激发了研究者做同样的事情。简单的百分比，百分比变化，相关分析和符号测试用于确定国务院或CBSE学生是否受益于NEET成为医学专业人士。MBBS学生入学率（国务院和CBSE两者之间没有显着关系）学生）在引入NEET之前和之后。从相关性分析可以推断，2017年在国务院和MBBS入学的学生的及格率低于2016年。还可以推断，从2016年到2017年，许多地区的学生入学MBBS课程的人数有所增加。研究人员得出的结论是，由于NEET，2017年CBSE学生的MBBS课程入学人数比2016年的州议会学生要多。与泰米尔纳德邦的CBSE学生相比，参加国务院考试的学生MBBS课程的入学人数要少。通过与医学教育系统有关的不同利益相关者的讨论，在设计和实施NEET方面还有改进的余地，这将有助于减少猖corruption的腐败现象，最重要的是，为基于医学教育优点的选择铺平了道路。可能的话，这也将为印度乃至全球医疗界的神圣性提供保障。研究人员从报纸，网站和期刊中收集数据。许多专家讨论，支持和反对NEET。没有人分析数据。这是一篇独特的文章，具有更多的统计分析和分析的有意义的解释。本文将对国家和全球各级政府制定医疗程序和政策有所帮助。