These are broad subject headings, into which the CICM Part II questions can be separated.
Why are they separated thus, one might ask.
Well, during his own preparation for the written exam the author felt that this was a beneficial way of structuring his reading. If one tries doing the past papers in chronological order without having done some preliminary reading, the process of revision becomes a rather disorganised gallop between different topics. Flicking back and forth across textbooks and publications, the candidate becomes enraged and bewildered. Instead, it seemed better to do the reading for a given topic all at once, and then to do all the SAQs which were relevant to that topic. In addition, the question count for each topic exists to add a certain weighting to some topics over others, so that the time-poor candidate can allocate their precious resources accordingly.
How were they separated into topics?
Some questions might fit equally well into multiple topics. Perhaps the SAQ might ask one to interpret an ABG, and offer an opinion as to why an elderly alcoholic might be comatose. The college answer then elaborates at length about Wernicke's encephalopathy. Into which pidgeonhole would you shove such a question? Is it more ABG related, or is it neuro, or gastro? To care too deeply about such things would be to lose one's mind. Each question is only allocated one topic, and if one goes through all the topics one ends up doing all the questions, which is the only important goal here. Taxonomy for the sake of taxonomy is madness.