Rejected applicants to the graduate entry scheme at Barts and The London medical school say they are angry they were turned down not through any lack of qualification or experience but because their "numbers did not come up".

The medical school says the three-stage process of selection had a random element which was necessary because the course was so over-subscribed.

But the process has also been criticised by the British Medical Association, which says it makes a mockery of equal opportunities.

More than 1,000 people applied for 40 places on what has become known as a fast-track entry system.

Candidates were first selected on the basis of degree qualification and then those who passed that criteria sat a test designed to measure their intelligence, values and personality - their suitability to be a doctor.

Medicine courses are heavily over-subscribed

Barts and The London say 650 people got through to this stage and were therefore deemed suitable to train as doctors.

The 650 were then whittled down to 120 for interview through a random selection process carried out by an external body.

One failed applicant for the course told BBC News Online she was angry to have been rejected not on merit but because her "number did not come up".

The woman asked not to be named because she fears being rejected as a trouble-maker when she applies to different courses next year.

"It is not based on merit. I have been rejected because my number never came out of the hat."

"I have spent two years ensuring my academic record, publication rate and relevant work experience were up to scratch and am disappointed to find random processes being used."

Mockery

The British Medical Association (BMA) is also unhappy with the selection system.

Peter Taysum, of the BMA's Medical Students Committee and Equal Opportunities Committee said he had not heard of any similar systems being used in the UK.

"I'm amazed. It makes a mockery of equal opportunity policy," he said.

"It could be that good quality candidates are being thrown out out of hand."

Barts and The London say the selection process was fair and that they rejected the idea of selecting by examination because they thought it would prejudice against certain candidates.

In line with government aims, it wants to widen the pool of people who become doctors.

A spokeswoman said: "We believe our admissions process to be robust, however we have been faced with a very difficult task.

"Many applicants have excellent qualifications (PhDs) and valuable experience in the health sector - however, we want our pool of interviewees to have a wide range of experiences, achievements and backgrounds.

"We believe that the 650 applicants who passed our initial selection criteria will make excellent doctors.

"Unfortunately we do not have the resources to take all of them on our graduate entry programme."

The medical school says similar systems have been used in other parts of Europe.

Fast-track

Michael Powell, of the Council of Heads of Medical Schools said: "Graduate entry programmes are very new and there is strong competition. They are over-subscribed."

The first graduate entry programmes began in 2000.

They became known as "fast-track" because they enable postgraduate students from non-scientific backgrounds to become doctors within four years instead of the usual five or six.

The row comes as universities face tough scrutiny over their admissions' processes.