Can I trust SDN?

[Gandyy]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I just want to throw out there that excellent, well-informed premed advisors do exist. In my case, my advisor agreed with all but the insanely neurotic bits of SDN (apply to a bajillion schools, you need x gpa before even attempting, etc). SDN is more convenient, though!

I had a decent pre-med advisor as well. The only thing she did wrong was just not tell me enough information. However, at least she didnt misconstrue information or feed me bad advice.

 

[raindropx]

Sdn is toxic

 

[Gandyy]

Sdn is toxic

kind of, not really though

 

[efle]

Toxic in the hot Britney spears kind of way!
I think playing a lot of online video games shows you some really toxic communities...SDN is very tame

 

[Gandyy]

Toxic in the hot Britney spears kind of way!
I think playing a lot of online video games shows you some really toxic communities...SDN is very tame

Oh my goodness, you play DOTA or league of legends dont you?

 

[raindropx]

Untamed and toxic

 

[efle]

Oh my goodness, you play DOTA or league of legends dont you?

Dota of course, I'm not 14 years old

 

[raindropx]

Nerd

 

[Gandyy]

Dota of course, I'm not 14 years old

From what I hear, All of these "MOBA" games have extremely toxic communities.

 

[HCHopeful]

.

 

[raindropx]

Bruh. On the MSAR, the median MCAT for matriculants is a 31. Which statistically means 50% of matriculants have a 31 or lower. Like, there's no denying that.

I'm not saying it's not a better idea to have a higher MCAT score. I'm saying people often forget that little statistic.

Also, even though the average applicant has a 28.6 MCAT, you also have to remember that 40% of applicants are accepted, so that score must be somewhat competitive.

Statistically those 50% have low chances at md schools.

 

[steelersfan1243]

Bruh. On the MSAR, the median MCAT for matriculants is a 31. Which statistically means 50% of matriculants have a 31 or lower. Like, there's no denying that.

I'm not saying it's not a better idea to have a higher MCAT score. I'm saying people often forget that little statistic.

Also, even though the average applicant has a 28.6 MCAT, you also have to remember that 40% of applicants are accepted, so that score must be somewhat competitive.

Just to emphasize what a median is:

31, 31, 31, 31, 31, 31, 35, 36, 36, 37, 38 Median: 31
This would make it seem a 28.6 is not that competitive

Just pointing this out, do not flame me bro

 

[jl lin]

Those who have a badge have been confirmed by SDN to have the credentials they purport.
I had to send evidence of being both a physician and a faculty member.

I suspected as much, but it's good to read it. 🙂

As an example, I had to send them not merely my email addy, but my own webpage from our university's website.

Where there is a lot of angst here, if not outright neuroticism, the overall advice is good, you can sense the gestalt of what's correct vs. what's BS, and most SDNers are quite helpful.

The trolls range from merely amusing to outright toxic. Don't worry, they get splat with the banhammer if they go off the rails (a very satisfying sound). You generally can spot a loose cannon right away.

In no particular order, and this list is NOT meant to be comprehensive, I have a very high regard for gyngyn, LizzyM, mimelim, SouthernSurgeon, HushCom, Law2doc, Catalystic, Ismet, DrMidLife, Winged Scapula, WedgeDawg, gonnif, DoktorMom, Cabinbuilder and GrapesofRath. They are plenty others who belong on the list, but my brain is shorting out right now.

I agree. I'm also a fan of @mimelim; b/c he's very balanced, clear, straightforward but doesn't hold back on expounding when necessary. I feel the same about @QofQuimica.

How many times do I hear advisors say invest in MSAR, etc? And these are people that actually are adcoms or have had experience with being on adcom.

I wil say that there is a neuroticism factor projected at times by others. I mean I can see where people would slow down their progress on the path to application--and sometimes that's a good thing, and other times, it may not be.
So now my approach is to keep my eyes on the road in front of me, while occasionally checking the sideview and rearview mirrors. If I stay focused on those other mirrors, I am definitely going to veer off the path and perhaps collide with something else. You have to pay attention to your own path, while cautiously taking in pertinent advice.

 

[jl lin]

FWIW, my school advisory committee disagrees with yours, and they agree with SDN that while it's not a kiss of death to be complete in September, it does hurt your chances relative to earlier applicants.

I mean that does make a lot of sense. Earlier is better.

 

[efle]

From what I hear, All of these "MOBA" games have extremely toxic communities.

Public matchmaking can be pretty bad. Much better to play with a group of friends

 

[LizzyM]

For instance, virtually any poster with <30 (or equivalent on 2015) MCAT is told to retake no matter what. The truth is, though, that 50% of applicants are accepted with a 31 or below, so a retake may not be necessary all of the time.

.

I don't know how you come up with the idea that 50% of applicants are accepted with a 31 or below. Less than 50% of applicants are admitted (43.6% to be precise) so where you are coming up this 50% business.

Let's look at the figures on AAMC's Table 24 https://www.aamc.org/download/321508/data/factstable24.pdf

From that we see that over a 3 year time period, 15,672 applicants with MCAT <30 were admitted to medical school out of 61K who were admitted meaning that ~25% of matriculants have MCAT < 30. Also, we see that the proportion of applicants admitted to medical school increases with increases in MCAT (While 39% of applicants with MCAT 27-29 were admitted, 57% of those with MCAT 30-32 were admitted.) The likelihood of being admitted is better than average for applicants with MCAT >29. Therefore, applicants with MCAT <30 are told to retake.

 

[Goro]

I concur. The national medians get skewed downward by the state schools like LSU, U KS, U AL whose stats are lower and who have a high IS preference.

I'd like to see what the median is for all the private schools (save Mercer and Loma Linda)!

Just to emphasize what a median is:

31, 31, 31, 31, 31, 31, 35, 36, 36, 37, 38 Median: 31
This would make it seem a 28.6 is not that competitive

Just pointing this out, do not flame me bro

My learned colleague LizzyM correctly illustrates why biostats should be a pre-req!

 

[rocklobstr]

I don't know how you come up with the idea that 50% of applicants are accepted with a 31 or below. Less than 50% of applicants are admitted (43.6% to be precise) so where you are coming up this 50% business.

I think they assumed the distribution was normal, i.e., 50% on either side of the median.

 

[HCHopeful]

I'm not arguing that a better MCAT score doesn't increase your chances. I'm simply saying that an MCAT below a 30 isn't nearly as lethal as SDN would have you believe.

As LizzyM points out, 39% of applicants with an MCAT of 27-29 were admitted. SDN would have you believe they have no chance and should retake no matter what.

And I fully admit to being lazy with the data. I didn't dig deeper and just used the median of a 31 and went from there. Whoopsie daisy.

If having a 27-29 MCAT gives one a 39% chance (independent of all other factors), I still stand by the opinion that for some people, retaking isn't necessary. It completely depends on your situation and state in which you live.

I will admit to defeat on this one. Damn you, SDN. I have lost again.

BUT, I still believe you all have standards above that of the average pre-med and that all you require is a bit unnecessary. But I am also a small town farm boy from Nebraska, so I can imagine our perspectives being a bit different.

One last thing, GO BIG RED! Almost college football time!

 

[619959]

Damn you, SDN. I have lost again.

LOL

 

[Law2Doc]

...
As LizzyM points out, 39% of applicants with an MCAT of 27-29 were admitted. SDN would have you believe they have no chance and should retake no matter what....

Well you are assuming though that those 39% don't have some "hook" that is the real reason they are being admitted despite their scores. Let's say of those 39%, 15% are minority, 15% are in-staters in applicant poor states, 5% have unbelievable connections, and 4% are soldiers, olympians, reality TV stars, Rhodes scholars. And lets say you and most of the other sub-30 applicants are, unfortunately, none of those things. Then you are potentially F&*(&d. Yes, your numbers are on par with 39% of those admitted, but frankly you really have no shot when in head to head comparison with any of these guys because of their "hook". And that's why maybe you need to retake. The numbers are a baseline, not the big picture. It's not enough to have the numbers and in fact when we are talking about those below average who get admitted, you can bet some factor other than numbers was at play. If you are average, you have a decent shot, so for aloo maybe you stand pat on a balanced 29-31 unless your practice tests suggest that's atypically low for you. If you are below average, though, it shouldn't be much solace that some people were able to get in because odds are just not really in your favor.

 

[Meeehai]

Me: Just need to bust my ass and get an A.
Other Pre-Med: Dude, B's get degrees. Don't worry.
Me: ...

It's not the grades you make, it's the hands you shake. 🙂

 

[sovereign0]

SDN is a resource for pre-meds. It isn't the end all, and the verified Adcoms who graciously share their opinions lends some credibility to the site.

It is not, however, the only resource. Your pre-med advising office, and other pre-med communities like /r/premed can also be resources.

The point here is to try not to rely on single, isolated pieces of information. This might be a nerdy comparison, but look at research. Stuff doesn't published until it has been rigorously tested, and if someone publishes something surprising, people won't believe it until others have come to similar conclusions. Facts and knowledge are often the result of consensus.

In a similar vein, you can't make life decisions based on information from a single source (like SDN) because we are biased. Even still, you shouldn't let others make decisions for you. You should consider multiple pieces of information, weigh them, and make up your own mind.

 

[frosted_flake]

I do. I was told by a pre-med advisor at my school that 'MD schools are not an option for you frostedflake, but there are always DO schools, which you know, uh, are sort of like chiropractic schools.' Needless to say I immediately thanked him for his time, and promptly walked out.
You bet your bacon I am not using the committee letter.

 

[Hospitalized]

In 2014, if you applied to medical school (MD only), you had a 41% chance of getting in. That's actually pretty high. SDN makes it seem like <10%. 41% of every single applicant that applied GOT IN. Think of all the bozos that apply to medical school. Just work your tail off in college, get some experience, know what you are getting into, and adcoms will appreciate you. Emphasis on the 'know what you are getting into' because schools invest a huge amount of money in every student. They want you to follow through.

 

[Nietzschelover]

Well you are assuming though that those 39% don't have some "hook" that is the real reason they are being admitted despite their scores. Let's say of those 39%, 15% are minority, 15% are in-staters in applicant poor states, 5% have unbelievable connections, and 4% are soldiers, olympians, reality TV stars, Rhodes scholars. And lets say you and most of the other sub-30 applicants are, unfortunately, none of those things. Then you are potentially F&*(&d. Yes, your numbers are on par with 39% of those admitted, but frankly you really have no shot when in head to head comparison with any of these guys because of their "hook". And that's why maybe you need to retake. The numbers are a baseline, not the big picture. It's not enough to have the numbers and in fact when we are talking about those below average who get admitted, you can bet some factor other than numbers was at play. If you are average, you have a decent shot, so for aloo maybe you stand pat on a balanced 29-31 unless your practice tests suggest that's atypically low for you. If you are below average, though, it shouldn't be much solace that some people were able to get in because odds are just not really in your favor.

Your points are well-taken but how are they any different for the 43% in general? In other words, yes, some of the 39% with lower MCAT may have some "hook," but isn't that also true for the 43% of all applicants who get in? And should or can we assume that more 29s get in than 27s?

 

[NewHorizons]

I concur. The national medians get skewed downward by the state schools like LSU, U KS, U AL whose stats are lower and who have a high IS preference.

I'd like to see what the median is for all the private schools (save Mercer and Loma Linda)!



My learned colleague LizzyM correctly illustrates why biostats should be a pre-req!

I agree >=D

 

[Psai]

It's not the grades you make, it's the hands you shake. 🙂

It's not the things you know it's the dudes you ... err know

 

[Goro]

Law2Doc summed it up very nicely in his last post above. 100 med school applicants do NOT have a 41% chance of getting accepted. everything has to be taking into context, especially of the geographic hook that L2D mentions.

Yes, 41% of all applicants got accepted, but YOU, the typical SDNer, are NOT necessarily in that 41%.

If one is not a resident of, say, NM, LA and GA, five med schools and their ~500+ seats, are now subtracted from the equation.

Now let's pull out U AR, U KS, U OK, U IA, and Central MI, all highly IS favoring.

Then add Brody, East TN, UNC, UCD and UCI.

Now lets subtract out the top of the top: Harvard, Yale, Pritzker, WashU and U Penn.

See how the numbers are starting to go down????

This is why I always suggest to target strategically...and don't be cookie cutter!

In 2014, if you applied to medical school (MD only), you had a 41% chance of getting in. That's actually pretty high. SDN makes it seem like <10%. 41% of every single applicant that applied GOT IN. Think of all the bozos that apply to medical school. Just work your tail off in college, get some experience, know what you are getting into, and adcoms will appreciate you. Emphasis on the 'know what you are getting into' because schools invest a huge amount of money in every student. They want you to follow through.

Your points are well-taken but how are they any different for the 43% in general? In other words, yes, some of the 39% with lower MCAT may have some "hook," but isn't that also true for the 43% of all applicants who get in? And should or can we assume that more 29s get in than 27s?

 

[Law2Doc]

Your points are well-taken but how are they any different for the 43% in general? In other words, yes, some of the 39% with lower MCAT may have some "hook," but isn't that also true for the 43% of all applicants who get in? And should or can we assume that more 29s get in than 27s?

Not really. If you are above average, your odds of getting in aren't bad even if you don't have one of the hooks I described. Of course you will still be competing with people who have such hooks, but your odds are still better -- places don't screen you out the way they might with a below average score and no reason for special attention.

And yes, in general, more 29s will get in than 27s. And in a year where they don't, you have to assume a lot of those 27s have something else huge going for them that you can't replicate.

 

[Yojimbo_OGT]

SDN is not perfect, but is miles better than premed advising at universities

This. A million times this.

I took the infamous practice MCAT #3, received a 30, and told my advisor about it. Her response..: You always get about 5 points higher on the actual MCAT.

So I proceeded to lightly study and instead focus on coursework. Took the actual MCAT: got a goddamn 22. Never asked for her advice again.

Edit: retook the MCAT after reviewing some formulas (unfortunately still didn't devote much time to studying, but at least I wasn't so blasé about taking it) and received a 30+. Still no 35 though....

 

[Goro]

I could probably publish a Medical Education paper with the thesis that most pre-med advisors have the brains of a flea.

This. A million times this.

I took the infamous practice MCAT #3, received a 30, and told my advisor about it. Her response..: You always get about 5 points higher on the actual MCAT.

So I proceeded to lightly study and instead focus on coursework. Took the actual MCAT: got a goddamn 22. Never asked for her advice again.

Edit: retook the MCAT after reviewing some formulas (unfortunately still didn't devote much time to studying, but at least I wasn't so blasé about taking it) and received a 30+. Still no 35 though....

 

[Law2Doc]

This. A million times this.

I took the infamous practice MCAT #3, received a 30, and told my advisor about it. Her response..: You always get about 5 points higher on the actual MCAT.

So I proceeded to lightly study and instead focus on coursework. Took the actual MCAT: got a goddamn 22. Never asked for her advice again.

Edit: retook the MCAT after reviewing some formulas (unfortunately still didn't devote much time to studying, but at least I wasn't so blasé about taking it) and received a 30+. Still no 35 though....

The conventional wisdom is you will score someplace in the range of 3 points above OR BELOW the average scores of your last few full length practice tests. 5 points above can happen but its *****ic to say "always" -- that's beyond the expected range of improvement by most metrics.

 

[Yojimbo_OGT]

The conventional wisdom is you will score someplace in the range of 3 points above OR BELOW the average scores of your last few full length practice tests. 5 points above can happen but its *****ic to say "always" -- that's beyond the expected range of improvement by most metrics.

Yes I was appalled by the audacity of my advisor. Point is, seeing how much effort that pre-meds on SDN put into preparing for the MCAT blew me away when I first got on here... leagues more than I ever dreamed of doing. I wish I knew of SDN before permanently botching my application with an atrocious 22 MCAT and subsequent low 30.

tl;dr You can trust what you see on SDN occasionally.

 

[Hospitalized]

Law2Doc summed it up very nicely in his last post above. 100 med school applicants do NOT have a 41% chance of getting accepted. everything has to be taking into context, especially of the geographic hook that L2D mentions.

Yes, 41% of all applicants got accepted, but YOU, the typical SDNer, are NOT necessarily in that 41%.

If one is not a resident of, say, NM, LA and GA, five med schools and their ~500+ seats, are now subtracted from the equation.

Now let's pull out U AR, U KS, U OK, U IA, and Central MI, all highly IS favoring.

Then add Brody, East TN, UNC, UCD and UCI.

Now lets subtract out the top of the top: Harvard, Yale, Pritzker, WashU and U Penn.

See how the numbers are starting to go down????

This is why I always suggest to target strategically...and don't be cookie cutter!

I'm going to argue that if you took 100 random medical school applicants, based on the 2014 statistic, then ~41% would get admitted. Now, if we were to take all of them from a certain geographic region, that's a different story. But that's not what the statistic I presented reflected.

We can always delve into the specific of admissions, but I was trying to be very surface. Is it misleading? That depends. I consider myself very familiar with the process, so to me it really means nothing. I'm sure there are plenty of SDN users from the states with high IS bias (I'm one of them). Those applicants, if well-learned on the process and apply to the right schools with their stats, probably have a higher chance of admission than 41%. Of course, the poor informed in a difficult geographic area may be well below a 41% chance.

 

[gyngyn]

Of course, the poor informed in a difficult geographic area may be well below a 41% chance.

61% of the applicants from CA do not get in anywhere.
Only 14.7% matriculate IS.
Poorly informed? Some, certainly.

 

[Hospitalized]

61% of the applicants from CA do not get in anywhere.
Are all of them poorly informed?

Not necessarily.

59% of all applicants do not get in anywhere, so I'm having a difficult time understanding what you are getting at. Your statistic is very close to the national average.

 

[Psai]

Not necessarily.

59% of all applicants do not get in anywhere, so I'm having a difficult time understanding what you are getting at. Your statistic is very close to the national average.

Yeah but cali applicants tend to be very high quality
A percentile tells you very little by itself

A few years ago mcdonalds had like a million apps for jobs and around a 6% acceptance rate. Does that mean that it was harder to get into than mit?

 

[gyngyn]

To be fair, I currently go to a good UC school and the number of my peers who are living in Cinderella land confident that their 3.5/26/no ec's will land them a spot at an MD medical school is ridiculously high. I just laugh,shake my head, and realize why the rate of 61% is as high as it is.

My waitlist is full of high quality IS applicants holding no acceptances every year.
We don't interview Cinderella!

 

[Hospitalized]

Yeah but cali applicants tend to be very high quality
A percentile tells you very little by itself

A few years ago mcdonalds had like a million apps for jobs and around a 6% acceptance rate. Does that mean that it was harder to get into than mit?

Source? There's a lot of people in California, so there's bound to be more good applicants. That doesn't mean there isn't plenty of weak applicants. I could be wrong though.

Also I'm not sure what you are trying to prove by comparing apples to oranges.

 

[gyngyn]

Source? There's a lot of people in California, so there's bound to be more good applicants. That doesn't mean there isn't plenty of weak applicants. I could be wrong though.

Also I'm not sure what you are trying to prove by comparing apples to oranges.

The point is that in a favorable state most of the unsuccessful Californians would be in medical school.
Since CA applicants have the compulsion to apply to all CA schools, we get to see the whole pool every year.

 

[Psai]

Source? There's a lot of people in California, so there's bound to be more good applicants. That doesn't mean there isn't plenty of weak applicants. I could be wrong though.

Also I'm not sure what you are trying to prove by comparing apples to oranges.

Im not trying to prove or compare anything kiddo just illustrating a simple point that you seem to have trouble understanding

 

[steelersfan1243]

Im not trying to prove or compare anything kiddo just illustrating a simple point that you seem to have trouble understanding

Don't call me kiddo, buddy

 

[efle]

Don't call me kiddo, buddy

 

[whitemagic]

My waitlist is full of high quality IS applicants holding no acceptances every year.
We don't interview Cinderella!

Given that they have managed to get interviews at California schools (which in and of itself is not an easy feat), is the fact that they hold no other acceptances due to them not applying broadly/smartly? I imagine that if you were able to get on a waitlist at a California school, then surely you also would have been able to get an acceptance at an OOS school? Or is my line of thinking off?

edit: @efle, god damn that is the most most perfectly placed video I have ever seen in all my time on SDN. I died.

 

[Pusheen]

Most people from CA would rather die than leave the OC 🙄

 

[efle]

Given that they have managed to get interviews at California schools (which in and of itself is not an easy feat), is the fact that they hold no other acceptances due to them not applying broadly/smartly? I imagine that if you were able to get on a waitlist at a California school, then surely you also would have been able to get an acceptance at an OOS school? Or is my line of thinking off?

edit: @efle, god damn that is the most most perfectly placed video I have ever seen in all my time on SDN. I died.

I think people 1) tend to underestimate how tough it is to get into Cali schools since they maintain surprisingly accessible numbers and 2) tend to be unwilling to leave Cali and do not apply to enough safer OOS options
Gyngyn will of course know better than I

Most people from CA would rather die than leave the OC 🙄

Those of us not from there hate the culture just as much as the rest of the country

 

[gyngyn]

Given that they have managed to get interviews at California schools (which in and of itself is not an easy feat), is the fact that they hold no other acceptances due to them not applying broadly/smartly? I imagine that if you were able to get on a waitlist at a California school, then surely you also would have been able to get an acceptance at an OOS school? Or is my line of thinking off?

I think there is a strong chance that this is true.

 

[whitemagic]

@efle, @gyngyn. Thank you guys for sharing your thoughts with me. Initially hearing that you had lots of qualified applicants to your waitlist with zero acceptances elsewhere made my heart sink. I have an II at some Cali schools (not really sure how I got so lucky here with a 3.7/28 ORM status, but I know its not over until I actually have the acceptance letter in my hand *knock on wood*), but I also came into this process applying to 32 schools and pretty much knowing I'd have to go OOS for school. So I feel blessed to be in this position in the first place! As long as I get an acceptance somewhere, I'll be more than ecstatic.

 

[Pusheen]

Those of us not from there hate the culture just as much as the rest of the country

I have mixed feelings about my home state. Like sure, it's fun, but it's also pretty vapid after a while. I personally would love to live at least for a while in a place with a little more culture and class (and rain for God's sake )