Add to my above colleagues' comments about in-person prerequisites a longstanding prejudice on the part of members of an Adcom against other allied health professionals (except Dentistry if they are tracked through the Oral/Maxillofacial Surgery program). It's not openly talked about, but I have definitely noticed that allied health professionals have a harder time and less benefit of the doubt about the prerequisites.
If your undergraduate is nursing, there is a specific expectation that you possess a license, have any and all licenses in current good standing, and that at least one of the licenses was used in verifiable practice (as in, the particular Board would consider the work active practice even if not for pay) for at least a nominal amount of time. For both of the schools that I serve on the adcom, anyone who is qualified for practice that possesses a license that is not in good standing for disciplinary reasons (even non-healthcare ones) are automatically rejected without consideration. Those that do not have any active practice licenses or do not practice at all with an active license have the burden to explain to the adcom and usually in the interview on why this is the case.
I professionally will automatically reject any applicant that is otherwise educationally qualified to practice in a healthcare profession who has never possessed a license or has never engaged in professional practice. There are just too many red flags with that situation from professional experience that I consider this non-admissible even with stellar numbers.