Am I understanding this wrong?

[sieg5]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Most med schools have no worse than a 3% acceptance rate, coupled with the fact that there are at least 25 med schools out there, isn't the only barrier having a terrible GPA (~3.2) and a terrible MCAT (~25) and how many applications you are willing to fill out? Why not apply to 30+ med schools?

 

[eggs13]

Time and Money. But mostly money.

/thread

 

[MedPR]

Time and Money. But mostly money.

/thread

👍

Also denial.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using SDN Mobile

 

[Josh7]

Most med schools have no worse than a 3% acceptance rate, coupled with the fact that there are at least 25 med schools out there, isn't the only barrier having a terrible GPA (~3.2) and a terrible MCAT (~25) and how many applications you are willing to fill out? Why not apply to 30+ med schools?

You're really on a roll Sieg

 

[Bangersandmash]

Are you saying that since 3% of applicants are accepted at most medical schools, statistically speaking if you apply to 34 schools you're guaranteed to get in somewhere even with low stats?

In the words of many girls I've spoken to: "Not gonna happen."

 

[487806]

You're really on a roll Sieg

Time and Money. But mostly money.

/thread

Sums it up pretty well. 👍

 

[Geebeejay]

Are you saying that since 3% of applicants are accepted at most medical schools, statistically speaking if you apply to 34 schools you're guaranteed to get in somewhere even with low stats?

In the words of many girls I've spoken to: "Not gonna happen."

Wait....I thought that since you have a 40% chance of getting into medical school, if you only apply to 3 schools you are guaranteed to get in!😱 Should I have applied to more than 3 schools? ****! Goddamn statistics!

 

[lobo.solo]

👍

Also denial.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using SDN Mobile

👍 the most important one!!!

 

[ShenanigansMD]

Wait....I thought that since you have a 40% chance of getting into medical school, if you only apply to 3 schools you are guaranteed to get in!😱 Should I have applied to more than 3 schools? ****! Goddamn statistics!

Haha that's why those calculators and that AAMC mcat/gpa chart mystify me. I see a percentage, but there's hardly any meaning in it.

 

[SpecterGT260]

👍

Also denial.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using SDN Mobile

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[def1]

Most med schools have no worse than a 3% acceptance rate, coupled with the fact that there are at least 25 med schools out there, isn't the only barrier having a terrible GPA (~3.2) and a terrible MCAT (~25) and how many applications you are willing to fill out? Why not apply to 30+ med schools?

You're doing your stats wrong brah. With a 3% acceptance rate even if you applied to all 141 US MD schools, your probability of getting in based on random chance would be 98.6%

 

[BigBlueBear]

you're doing your stats wrong brah. With a 3% acceptance rate even if you applied to all 141 us md schools, your probability of getting in based on random chance would be 98.6%

+1

 

[MiracleforMD]

Does OP realize that applicants can have multiple acceptances?

Also, ITT statisticians weep.

 

[IlDestriero]

60% of the time, you get in all the time.
👍

 

[ComradeDoktor]

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is critical."

--A Wise Man

 

[Translation]

you're not evening considering the non-academic aspects of admissions.

it's more than numbers, you need a soul

but weak stats, just make it that much harder to get an invite.

LizzyM says just be in the top 40% of your respective demographic (grades, and ECs) and you should get in 100% of the time. 😉

 

[pre med 2014]

Are you saying that since 3% of applicants are accepted at most medical schools, statistically speaking if you apply to 34 schools you're guaranteed to get in somewhere even with low stats?

In the words of many girls I've spoken to: "Not gonna happen."

I think this is what he thought lol.

 

[sieg5]

There are two things we can gather from this: the acceptance rate of pre meds is 30-40%. This means one of two things:
People need to apply to more schools and if they did, this percentage would sharply increase or:
People who get denied have such bad credentials that they can't get in anywhere, or it's both of these things.

 

[SpecterGT260]

My point is, the acceptance rate of pre meds is 30-40%. This means one of two things:
People need to apply to more schools and if they did, this percentage would sharply increase or:
People who get denied have such bad credentials that they can't get in anywhere, or it's both of these things.

Schools don't have many empty seats. So there goes that theory

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[Translation]

My point is, the acceptance rate of pre meds is 30-40%. This means one of two things:
People need to apply to more schools and if they did, this percentage would sharply increase or:
People who get denied have such bad credentials that they can't get in anywhere.

Or it's both.

for school xyz:
more applicants, doesn't mean more acceptances, the number of seats is still the same.
acceptance rate would decrease, and class profile stats would maybe increase or remain the same.

 

[def1]

My point is, the acceptance rate of pre meds is 30-40%. This means one of two things:
People need to apply to more schools and if they did, this percentage would sharply increase or:
People who get denied have such bad credentials that they can't get in anywhere, or it's both of these things.

I think it more likely means there are not enough seats to fill every applicant.

If your logic was true, then there would be a lot of unfilled seats each year which I highly doubt.

Edit* you guys are fast 😛

 

[BigBlueBear]

Thank goodness most med schools don't require statistics or logic courses. OP would be in trouble!

 

[Black Mamba24]

60% of the time, you get in all the time.
👍

👍

 

[lobo.solo]

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is critical."

--A Wise Man

👍 very wise man

 

[MedPR]

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is critical."

--A Wise Man

👍

 

[487806]

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is critical."

--A Wise Man

Indeed 👍

 

[CoxMD]

There are two things we can gather from this: the acceptance rate of pre meds is 30-40%. This means one of two things:
People need to apply to more schools and if they did, this percentage would sharply increase or:
People who get denied have such bad credentials that they can't get in anywhere, or it's both of these things.

There's a finite # of seats available. # of seats < # of applicants

Also, you have no idea how independent statistical events work do you? Applying to the 25 schools you suggest with each having a 3% acceptance rate would give you only a <18% overall acceptance rate.

Sent from my Nexus 10

 

[Narmerguy]

I really wish the MCAT tested statistics.

 

[sinombre]

There are two things we can gather from this: the acceptance rate of pre meds is 30-40%. This means one of two things:
People need to apply to more schools and if they did, this percentage would sharply increase or:
People who get denied have such bad credentials that they can't get in anywhere, or it's both of these things.

Your grasp (or lack thereof) of basic logic is bewildering. Medical schools have a fixed number of seats.

 

[sinombre]

i really wish the mcat tested statistics.

+1

 

[Doctor Strange]

lolwut

My AP stat teacher is crying a river right now.

 

[SpecterGT260]

I really wish the MCAT tested statistics.

Or just critical literature review. I think that would be a very positive thing

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[Narmerguy]

Or just critical literature review. I think that would be a very positive thing

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

Ooh very true but I actually think that could be harder. Could you imagine the amazingly vague, convoluted questions the MCAT makers would write?

 

[sinombre]

Ooh very true but I actually think that could be harder. Could you imagine the amazingly vague, convoluted questions the MCAT makers would write?

On the bright side, verbal reasoning would be less daunting.

 

[SpecterGT260]

Ooh very true but I actually think that could be harder. Could you imagine the amazingly vague, convoluted questions the MCAT makers would write?

I don't even remember what the mcat was like. I remember it being long.

I was just saying I don't think the ability to work actual stats is as important as understanding statistical concepts. I see many people look at papers and have absolutely no idea what the paper is actually saying. Or worse, the writers attempt to draw unsupported conclusions and people say "well its in the conclusions section! I think the authors know more about this than you do!" (I have had that said directly to me on many occasions when challenging literature. Unbeknownst to me papers in <1 impact factor journals are apparently gospel).

They could do this in medschool too, but I have always considered the mcat to be more about your critical thinking ability than it is about what you know, and literature analysis has all sorts of critical thinking applications.

 

[Law2Doc]

OP you are oversimplifying statistics in a harmful way. Just because a school has a 3% acceptance rate doesn't mean YOU have a 3% chance of getting in. For example, let's say the guy toward the bottom of your college class, Bob, graduates with a B- average, tanks the MCAT, has weak ECs, and isn't a great interviewee. He doesn't ave a 3% chance of getting in, he has a 0%. doesn't matter if he applies to 120 med schools, his odds stay zero. Similarly, the guy at the top of your class, Steve, has a 4.0/40, great ECs, and is a blast at interviews. He has a 90% chance of getting in. Doesn't matter if he applies to one school or 120 he's getting into most. Thus you see the 3% isn't relevant. That's just the resultant odds when you average out all the Bobs and Steves of the world. So applying to more programs doesn't necessarily improve your odds, just widens your circle of shame.

 

[Planes2Doc]

"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is critical."

--A Wise Man

And don't forget lingerie.

What people that apply to tons of schools need to realize is that great effort must be placed into secondary essays. Those schools that don't require them are just awesome, but the ones that do are a pain. My actually wise premed advisor told me that some people shoot themselves in the foot by half-assing the essays.

 

[1stmeds]

63% of statistics are actually made up.

 

[mimelim]

OP you are oversimplifying statistics in a harmful way. Just because a school has a 3% acceptance rate doesn't mean YOU have a 3% chance of getting in. For example, let's say the guy toward the bottom of your college class, Bob, graduates with a B- average, tanks the MCAT, has weak ECs, and isn't a great interviewee. He doesn't ave a 3% chance of getting in, he has a 0%. doesn't matter if he applies to 120 med schools, his odds stay zero. Similarly, the guy at the top of your class, Steve, has a 4.0/40, great ECs, and is a blast at interviews. He has a 90% chance of getting in. Doesn't matter if he applies to one school or 120 he's getting into most. Thus you see the 3% isn't relevant. That's just the resultant odds when you average out all the Bobs and Steves of the world. So applying to more programs doesn't necessarily improve your odds, just widens your circle of shame.

I agree with the basics of your post, but disagree with your conclusion. In the extremes, there are applicants that it is silly to apply to lots of programs because they are almost assured entrance to medical schools or have virtually zero chance. But, for the vast majority of applicants, things are not that black and white. It is a common saying that the number one reason for not matching into residency is to not apply to or interview at enough programs. While, I certainly don't know of a source that shows this, I do know several people that this happened to last year and the same principle can be loosely applied to medical school. The more schools you apply to, the more 'chances' one has of catching the eye of adcoms. Certainly we can agree that your chances of getting into a school doesn't decrease by adding more schools, while at the same time the marginal utility of adding schools will be different for different applicants.

 

[SpecterGT260]

I agree with the basics of your post, but disagree with your conclusion. In the extremes, there are applicants that it is silly to apply to lots of programs because they are almost assured entrance to medical schools or have virtually zero chance. But, for the vast majority of applicants, things are not that black and white. It is a common saying that the number one reason for not matching into residency is to not apply to or interview at enough programs. While, I certainly don't know of a source that shows this, I do know several people that this happened to last year and the same principle can be loosely applied to medical school. The more schools you apply to, the more 'chances' one has of catching the eye of adcoms. Certainly we can agree that your chances of getting into a school doesn't decrease by adding more schools, while at the same time the marginal utility of adding schools will be different for different applicants.

For residency it has a lot to do with the match algorithm. I don't think it really applies to med admissions. I think the point he is making is you cannot just play the stats to gain entry. To some degree you can play them with residency.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[MedPR]

There are two things we can gather from this: the acceptance rate of pre meds is 30-40%. This means one of two things:
People need to apply to more schools and if they did, this percentage would sharply increase or:
People who get denied have such bad credentials that they can't get in anywhere, or it's both of these things.

There's one thing you can gather from that. The acceptance percentage would sharply increase following a sharp decrease in applicants.

 

[mimelim]

For residency it has a lot to do with the match algorithm. I don't think it really applies to med admissions. I think the point he is making is you cannot just play the stats to gain entry. To some degree you can play them with residency.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

I guess. Certainly if you are a US grad, you will likely match somewhere if you apply to enough. At the same time, I think for the vast majority of applicants, applying wide and appropriately for your stats is very important. But, then again, I applied for 65 residency programs and interviewed at 18 which was a little excessive. I'm just a worrier 😛

 

[SpecterGT260]

I guess. Certainly if you are a US grad, you will likely match somewhere if you apply to enough. At the same time, I think for the vast majority of applicants, applying wide and appropriately for your stats is very important. But, then again, I applied for 65 residency programs and interviewed at 18 which was a little excessive. I'm just a worrier 😛

I'll probably do the same thing haha. That is the thing with stats though. My GF found the nrmp match data PDF and showed it to me as if I don't have it memorized she found the page that lists match rates by number of ranks and couldn't figure out why matching didn't have a linear relationship with number of ranks. She wasn't considering that those people ranking 20 programs may be weaker applicants which explains the drop. People don't always realize there are things not shown in your average 2D correlation plot.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

 

[Narmerguy]

I'll probably do the same thing haha. That is the thing with stats though. My GF found the nrmp match data PDF and showed it to me as if I don't have it memorized she found the page that lists match rates by number of ranks and couldn't figure out why matching didn't have a linear relationship with number of ranks. She wasn't considering that those people ranking 20 programs may be weaker applicants which explains the drop. People don't always realize there are things not shown in your average 2D correlation plot.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using SDN Mobile

If people understood multivariate regression...

 

[IslandStyle808]

OP you are oversimplifying statistics in a harmful way. Just because a school has a 3% acceptance rate doesn't mean YOU have a 3% chance of getting in. For example, let's say the guy toward the bottom of your college class, Bob, graduates with a B- average, tanks the MCAT, has weak ECs, and isn't a great interviewee. He doesn't ave a 3% chance of getting in, he has a 0%. doesn't matter if he applies to 120 med schools, his odds stay zero. Similarly, the guy at the top of your class, Steve, has a 4.0/40, great ECs, and is a blast at interviews. He has a 90% chance of getting in. Doesn't matter if he applies to one school or 120 he's getting into most. Thus you see the 3% isn't relevant. That's just the resultant odds when you average out all the Bobs and Steves of the world. So applying to more programs doesn't necessarily improve your odds, just widens your circle of shame.

If he applies broadly his chances are 90% more or less, if he applies to one school (or an extremely small amount) this is not accurate.