As medical school curricula incorporate more active learning sessions, quality peer‐to‐peer interactions become increasingly important in the learning process. Students possess unique backgrounds and attributes that may help bolster not only their individual performance, but the performance of their peers as well. At the University of Arizona College of Medicine – Phoenix, the Clinical Anatomy (CA) block employs a hybrid approach: integrating lecture and lab activities to enhance active, peer‐driven learning. Five to six students are randomly assigned to a willed body donor for the entire course, with one instructor per table. The first half of each session consists of a slide presentation interspersed with stopping points to view structures on the right side of the donor, dissected the day before by allied health students. For the remainder of the session, the medical students dissect the left side of the donor and participate in quizzing activities with their table instructor. The objective of this study is to determine whether there is a correlation between a student’s pre‐medical school background, the background of their peer group, and CA exam performance. Retrospective, de‐identified data were collected from 285 first‐year medical students from four classes (2019–2022), including: age, gender, race, ethnicity, college, science and cumulative undergraduate GPA, undergraduate major, anatomy table group, and individual and cumulative CA exam scores. Univariate and multivariate linear regressions were utilized to assess the relationships between student characteristics and anatomy exam scores. Within the univariate analysis, students >30 years old scored lower than peers on exams 1 and 2 (p<0.01) and had a lower cumulative average (−5.7 mean difference, p<0.01), while students with MCAT scores ≥513 performed better than peers on exams 2 and 3 (p<0.05 and p<0.01, respectively) and had a higher cumulative average (+1.9 mean difference, p<0.05). Furthermore, students who had attended private undergraduate institutions scored higher than peers on exams 2 and 3 (p<0.01) and had a higher cumulative average (+2.6 mean difference, p<0.01), while students who had attended institutions outside Arizona scored higher than peers on exams 2 and 3 (p<0.05) and had a higher cumulative average (+1.3 mean difference, p<0.05). However, the multivariate analysis revealed significant relationships for only one parameter, with students >30 years old scoring lower than peers on exams 1 and 2 (p<0.01 and p<0.05, respectively) and demonstrating a lower cumulative average (−5.5 mean difference, p<0.05). Further analyses will elucidate the potential effect of peer group background on CA exam performance; however, these results indicate that most background characteristics do not correlate with performance in anatomy.