DO admissions vs. MD admissions

[BobbyT]

Is there any difference on how DO admissions committee evaluate their applicants vs. an MD admissions committee?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[GreenShirt]

You submit the same information to both, so technically they make their decisions based on the same factors. Some say that DO adcoms "look beyond the numbers for well rounded applicants" which is why DO admission stats are lower in terms of pure numbers. Since I don't sit on an adcom, I can't really say if this is true or mearly urban legend.

 

[youngtraumadoc]

I think they look at roughly the same things (numbers, ECs, LORs, essays...)
However, osteopathic differs in that they really like to see that their applicants have researched 'osteopathic medicine." Allopathic schools kinda assume this based on your essays and ECs but osteopathic really look to make sure you know that osteopathic medicine is different form allopathic med. This may be in the form of 1. are some of your LOR from DO 2. Did you shadow a DO 3. why DO instead of allopathic.

On here you will find that many interviewers ask simply "so...what do you know about osteopathic medicine?" A bad answer here will really hurt you application regardless of your numbers and such.

 

[jzeidenb]

do you think the personal statement should focus specifically on why you want to go DO, or is that more of a secondary app thing?

Im wondering if the same essay i used for the MD app is acceptable, since i think that one is solid (but it just talks about why I want to be a physician, not an MD or DO)

 

[StringerBell]

do you think the personal statement should focus specifically on why you want to go DO, or is that more of a secondary app thing?

Almost all the secondaries that I can remember have some form of "Why D.O.?" or "Why would you make a good Osteopathic Physician?" Save it for the Secondaries. If you want to use your MD PS over again, just make sure it doesn't say things like "I really want to be an MD" and occasionally put the phrase "Osteopathic" in front of where you wrote "Physician." I'm half-kidding. But only half.

As far as if there is any real difference between the admissions decisions, I will make the following comment, but PLEASE understand that this is pure conjecture based merely on my experiences:
M.D. schools put a greater emphasis on research and D.O. schools a greater emphasis on clinical experience. I have essentially no research experience, but 6 years of experience working in an osteopathic clinic and then at a community hospital. Many of the D.O. applicants that I encountered on interviews were older, non-trad, and had lots of health care experience. This includes nurses, EMT's, etc. The M.D. applicants I encountered were younger, with research experience, and working on Master's-level degrees in the sciences, with heavy emphasis on research. Again, this is all conjecture, but it's something you might want to consider.

 

[noonday]

I think they look at roughly the same things (numbers, ECs, LORs, essays...)
However, osteopathic differs in that they really like to see that their applicants have researched 'osteopathic medicine." Allopathic schools kinda assume this based on your essays and ECs but osteopathic really look to make sure you know that osteopathic medicine is different form allopathic med. This may be in the form of 1. are some of your LOR from DO 2. Did you shadow a DO 3. why DO instead of allopathic.

On here you will find that many interviewers ask simply "so...what do you know about osteopathic medicine?" A bad answer here will really hurt you application regardless of your numbers and such.

i disagree.

i applied both MD and DO and got in both MD and DO (all the DO i applied to, one MD, and went DO). i had no DO shadowing. i had no DO letter (MD letter). i didn't write anything about the osteopathic philosophy or OMM anywhere. i treated them both exactly the same (since, well, functionally most all DO's are the same as MD's and pratice the same, too, except the few who specialize in OMT). in my interviews, i was only asked once in one about the whole DO thing, including if i'd applied both. i was honest i said i wanted to be a doctor. i wanted to practice medicine. i see both degrees as equal vehicles to that end, and i applied to a lot of both to give myself the best chance of getting into a school at all. i threw in that i actually didn't know much about OMT and id' never been treated with it, but that i liked and supported all sorts of other "alternative therapies" like acupuncture and herbal therapies, and that i was open to learning and using anything that worked.

if you ARE gung-ho DO and/or OMT, by all means fly that flag and run with it all the way. but if you're NOT, i guarantee you (as a former interviewer for my undergrad alma mater) they can smell it a mile away. better to be honest instead of using some canned reply that 90% of the students they interview will use.

a lot of your interviewers (and future profs) are PhD's anyway. and some are MD's. and you will not know since they introduce themselves as "Dr." they have little invested in the DO/MD battle. they just want good, competent, honest students. and in the rare case where you do get a stickler, well, it may backfire, but those occasions are much rarer than you think. even most of my OMM profs (i think...and i was interviewed by one at the school i now attend) would rather you be honest, i think.

they are equal degrees to the same end. treat them the same.

 

[Lamont]

i'll second that, thats pretty much on target

 

[Taty]

i disagree.

i applied both MD and DO and got in both MD and DO (all the DO i applied to, one MD, and went DO). i had no DO shadowing. i had no DO letter (MD letter). i didn't write anything about the osteopathic philosophy or OMM anywhere. i treated them both exactly the same (since, well, functionally most all DO's are the same as MD's and pratice the same, too, except the few who specialize in OMT). in my interviews, i was only asked once in one about the whole DO thing, including if i'd applied both. i was honest i said i wanted to be a doctor. i wanted to practice medicine. i see both degrees as equal vehicles to that end, and i applied to a lot of both to give myself the best chance of getting into a school at all. i threw in that i actually didn't know much about OMT and id' never been treated with it, but that i liked and supported all sorts of other "alternative therapies" like acupuncture and herbal therapies, and that i was open to learning and using anything that worked.

if you ARE gung-ho DO and/or OMT, by all means fly that flag and run with it all the way. but if you're NOT, i guarantee you (as a former interviewer for my undergrad alma mater) they can smell it a mile away. better to be honest instead of using some canned reply that 90% of the students they interview will use.

a lot of your interviewers (and future profs) are PhD's anyway. and some are MD's. and you will not know since they introduce themselves as "Dr." they have little invested in the DO/MD battle. they just want good, competent, honest students. and in the rare case where you do get a stickler, well, it may backfire, but those occasions are much rarer than you think. even most of my OMM profs (i think...and i was interviewed by one at the school i now attend) would rather you be honest, i think.

they are equal degrees to the same end. treat them the same.

It is exactly what I did....

 

[youngtraumadoc]

i disagree.

i applied both MD and DO and got in both MD and DO (all the DO i applied to, one MD, and went DO). i had no DO shadowing. i had no DO letter (MD letter). i didn't write anything about the osteopathic philosophy or OMM anywhere. i treated them both exactly the same (since, well, functionally most all DO's are the same as MD's and pratice the same, too, except the few who specialize in OMT). in my interviews, i was only asked once in one about the whole DO thing, including if i'd applied both. i was honest i said i wanted to be a doctor. i wanted to practice medicine. i see both degrees as equal vehicles to that end, and i applied to a lot of both to give myself the best chance of getting into a school at all. i threw in that i actually didn't know much about OMT and id' never been treated with it, but that i liked and supported all sorts of other "alternative therapies" like acupuncture and herbal therapies, and that i was open to learning and using anything that worked.

if you ARE gung-ho DO and/or OMT, by all means fly that flag and run with it all the way. but if you're NOT, i guarantee you (as a former interviewer for my undergrad alma mater) they can smell it a mile away. better to be honest instead of using some canned reply that 90% of the students they interview will use.

a lot of your interviewers (and future profs) are PhD's anyway. and some are MD's. and you will not know since they introduce themselves as "Dr." they have little invested in the DO/MD battle. they just want good, competent, honest students. and in the rare case where you do get a stickler, well, it may backfire, but those occasions are much rarer than you think. even most of my OMM profs (i think...and i was interviewed by one at the school i now attend) would rather you be honest, i think.

they are equal degrees to the same end. treat them the same.

There are always exceptions. My post was based on my experience of applying to MD and DO schools. I was never asked by an allopathic ADCOM what is allopathic medicine but instead why do you wish to pursue medicine. DO ADCOMs DID ask what is the philosophy of osteopathic medicine. Your higher ranking schools will place more emphasis on this obviously.

Also, you will have plenty of opportunities in your secondaries and interviews to convey your knowledge of osteopathic medicine that you don't really need to mention a lot about it in your primaries.

 

[noonday]

There are always exceptions. My post was based on my experience of applying to MD and DO schools. I was never asked by an allopathic ADCOM what is allopathic medicine but instead why do you wish to pursue medicine. DO ADCOMs DID ask what is the philosophy of osteopathic medicine. Your higher ranking schools will place more emphasis on this obviously.

Also, you will have plenty of opportunities in your secondaries and interviews to convey your knowledge of osteopathic medicine that you don't really need to mention a lot about it in your primaries.

i guess what i'm really saying, though, is even when the app says "osteopathic medicine" it is really just, well, medicine, even in secondaries. no need to blow smoke up the butts of the adcom about osteopathy if it's not your real feelings. they know. really, they DO know how the majority of applicants really feel. if anything, by not being obsequious about the DO part and just treating it like med school you will stand out more.

and who asks/cares has nothing do to with the school as a whole or any "rank" (and arguably, there is no rank, and funny how no one in med school cares about the concept of "rank" as far as i can tell) and everything to do with the individual interviewing you. you do think a physiology PhD at any school really cares, for example, if you understand the principles of counterstrain?

 

[t-funk]

I do not yet know the outcome as I haven't been through the whole admissions process, but I have chosen to be very straight-foward on my secondaries about why I want to be a DO and not just a physician. Once again, I do not know how adcoms will view this but I answered the questions honestly and I really wanted the adcoms to know that I want to be a DO.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

really look to make sure you know that osteopathic medicine is different from allopathic med

Edited to make this a more correct statement:

really look to make sure you know that they think osteopathic medicine is different from allopathic med and are willing to at least claim to believe it.

 

[GreenShirt]

Edited to make this a more correct statement:

I think the point is not to admit students who are going to be unhappy down the road with their decision and drop out, eventually campaign to have the DO degree changed to the MDDOabcedefgMD degree or other BS title, or not accept the seat in the class in the first place. And not so much to brain wash pre-meds into a cult.

It's pretty obvious on interviews who's an MD hopeful using DO as back up b/c the app cycle isn't going well. They ask questions like "Do you practice OMM on mannekins?" of the admissions directors (*groan*)...you don't want to be that person if you're seriously considering DO school.

 

[noonday]

I do not yet know the outcome as I haven't been through the whole admissions process, but I have chosen to be very straight-foward on my secondaries about why I want to be a DO and not just a physician. Once again, I do not know how adcoms will view this but I answered the questions honestly and I really wanted the adcoms to know that I want to be a DO.

that's totally cool and great. and it seems true for you that it's DO you WANT, not just anyway to be a doc. what i was saying was that if you're not gung-ho DO only, don't lie and pretend, is all.

good luck.

 

[Pansit]

You also have to realize that your MCAT score is suppose to be a good indicator of your success on the USMLE and not the COMLEX. According to a study (i dont have the source, but it's here somewhere in SDN), a students GPA correlated much more strongly to success on the COMLEX than the USMLE. So this is probably one reason why they dont look as strongly on MCAT score. DO schools dont care how well you do on the USMLE but on how well you do the COMLEX which correlates much more with your GPA.

 

[DropkickMurphy]

I think the point is not to admit students who are going to be unhappy down the road with their decision and drop out, eventually campaign to have the DO degree changed to the MDDOabcedefgMD degree or other BS title, or not accept the seat in the class in the first place. And not so much to brain wash pre-meds into a cult.

The point should be that the fields are so close to one another to make any differences, other than OMM and the COMLEX exam instead of the USMLE. "Why DO?" really is not a valid question. "Why medicine?" or "Why *insert name of school*?" is much more valid. I didn't imply it was a cult, I just implied that it seems like the only people who actually believe that spiel are the small minority of old timers who remember having to fight for practice rights and the even smaller minority of newbies who seem hell bent on digging their hells in and refusing to budge while everyone else just go about their daily lives as practicing physicians, not practicing osteopathic physicians. You'd think they'd catch on when the number of people practicing the one thing that clinically seperates allopathic from osteopathic is not really even best described as a minority. They are approaching being statistical outliers at this point.

It's pretty obvious on interviews who's an MD hopeful using DO as back up b/c the app cycle isn't going well. They ask questions like "Do you practice OMM on mannekins?" of the admissions directors (*groan*)...you don't want to be that person if you're seriously considering DO school.

Well, there are *****s in every group. You'd think a couple of years of general education courses (because you have to play along with whatever the prof believes in most of them in order to pass with an A) would have taught them the fine art that is diplomatic bull****ting.

 

[DocBR]

The point should be that the fields are so close to one another to make any differences, other than OMM and the COMLEX exam instead of the USMLE. "Why DO?" really is not a valid question. "Why medicine?" or "Why *insert name of school*?" is much more valid. I didn't imply it was a cult, I just implied that it seems like the only people who actually believe that spiel are the small minority of old timers who remember having to fight for practice rights and the even smaller minority of newbies who seem hell bent on digging their hells in and refusing to budge while everyone else just go about their daily lives as practicing physicians, not practicing osteopathic physicians. You'd think they'd catch on when the number of people practicing the one thing that clinically seperates allopathic from osteopathic is not really even best described as a minority. They are approaching being statistical outliers at this point.

Well, there are *****s in every group. You'd think a couple of years of general education courses (because you have to play along with whatever the prof believes in most of them in order to pass with an A) would have taught them the fine art that is diplomatic bull****ting.

100% agree. I am happy with my decision to go DO, but in reality if I ended up DO or MD it really wouldn't matter to me. I am happy I will learn OMT, am really excited about the school I am attending, etc but wouldn't be heart broken if I was saving money at a public MD school.

Luckily they didn't ask "Why DO?" but if they had and I was honest it would have gone something like this:

Interviewer: Why DO?

Me: The first part of DO is doctor. I want to be a doctor.

If they had asked me, then I probably would have played the game. I like to think my interviewers (who were all under 35) knew the question was worthless and choose not to ask it because it was a waste of time.

 

[CommanderRiker]

Is there any difference on how DO admissions committee evaluate their applicants vs. an MD admissions committee?

Riker here.

D.O. colleges usually have lower admission standards. They also like the applicant to be informed on osteopathy. Lest he wishes to make a fool of himself. Other than these two characteristics, there are no differences.

Riker-Gamma out.