BackgroundPreclinical medical education is content-dense and time-constrained. Flipped classroom approaches promote durable learning, but challenges with unsatisfactory student preparation and high workload remain. Cognitive load theory defines instructional design as “efficient” if learners can master the presented concepts without cognitive overload. We created a PReparatory Evaluation Process (PREP) to systematically assess and measure improvement in the cognitive-load efficiency of preparatory materials and impact on study time (time-efficiency).MethodsWe conducted this study in a flipped, multidisciplinary course for ~ 170 first year students at Harvard Medical School using a naturalistic post-test design. For each flipped session (n = 97), we assessed cognitive load and preparatory study time by administering a 3-item PREP survey embedded within a short subject-matter quiz students completed before class. Over three years (2017–2019), we evaluated cognitive load- and time- based efficiency to guide iterative revisions of the materials by content experts. The ability of PREP to detect changes to the instructional design (sensitivity) was validated through a manual audit of the materials.ResultsThe average survey response rate was ≥ 94%. Content expertise was not required to interpret PREP data. Initially students did not necessarily allocate the most study time to the most difficult content. Over time, the iterative changes in instructional design increased the cognitive load- and time-based efficiency of preparatory materials with large effect sizes (p< .01). Furthermore, this increased the overall alignment of cognitive load with study time: students allocated more time to difficult content away from more familiar, less difficult content without increasing workload overall.ConclusionsCognitive load and time constraints are important parameters to consider when designing curricula. The PREP process is learner-centered, grounded in educational theory, and works independently of content knowledge. It can provide rich and actionable insights into instructional design of flipped classes not captured by traditional satisfaction-based evaluations.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-023-04325-x.