Med school admissions is biased?

[studentdoctorpremed]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I found this research study shared on facebook earlier today and I'm not sure if I feel like the data is obvious or if I should feel surprised. I know most of my friends want to go to med school because of money so I guess that part is not surprising but some parts of it did surprise me, and I now feel like I won't have a strong chance because I don't come from a rich family. anyways, I thought sdn members would benefit from this data because they seem pretty interesting regarding admissions. what are your thoughts? everything obvious in there or unexpected?

US Medical School Admissions Study | SortSmart® Candidate Selection

 

[Trollest]

As someone who is poor or whatever they call it these days, socially/ economically disadvantaged but you get the point. I don't think there is any bias, it just that well off kids tend to have a better education thus end up nailing their exam, hence the high percentage.

 

[deleted480308]

I found this research study shared on facebook earlier today and I'm not sure if I feel like the data is obvious or if I should feel surprised. I know most of my friends want to go to med school because of money so I guess that part is not surprising but some parts of it did surprise me, and I now feel like I won't have a strong chance because I don't come from a rich family. anyways, I thought sdn members would benefit from this data because they seem pretty interesting regarding admissions. what are your thoughts? everything obvious in there or unexpected?

US Medical School Admissions Study | SortSmart® Candidate Selection

You are shocked that wealthy kids are more likely to think about being a doctor and afford the extra experiences that make admitmore likely?

 

[Welshman]

The admission process is intentionally skewed to try and make up for the above

 

[studentdoctorpremed]

You are shocked that wealthy kids are more likely to think about being a doctor and afford the extra experiences that make admitmore likely?

I guess not shocked about that - I'm actually not sure if I'm more shocked or think this is obvious like I said, but what i found interesting was that none of the admissions tool can filter out those that want to become doctors just for the money. There's lots of other points in the data that did shock me if you take a look you'll see what I mean. For example, I thought rich people get in because they can afford coaching and mcat prep but it seems like that has nothing to do with it.

 

[infectiousdisease101]

No one person is 100% biased free. That's why you have a committee of people, to be as objective as possible.

 

[studentdoctorpremed]

No one person is 100% biased free. That's why you have a committee of people, to be as objective as possible.

True but seems like it's not working.

 

[GoCubsGo20]

I'm not sure admissions counselors are biased towards low income applicants, but low SES (or whatever AAMC refers to it as) definitely gives the applicant a unique point of view and experiences that the majority of applicants (i.e. non-SES) have no exposure to. It made for very interesting conversations at my interviews and helped set myself apart tremendously.

I can say, though, that some of my wealthy classmates had access to things and services that would've undoubtedly helped me moving forward during high school and undergrad. Some of them still receive many "blessings" (idk what else to call them) from their parents that definitely help make life a little (who am I kidding, a lot) easier. Obviously this has no affect on admissions counselors - maybe it does, who knows, I'm not one - but having a high income definitely helps in many different ways.

 

[deleted480308]

I guess not shocked about that - I'm actually not sure if I'm more shocked or think this is obvious like I said, but what i found interesting was that none of the admissions tool can filter out those that want to become doctors just for the money. There's lots of other points in the data that did shock me if you take a look you'll see what I mean. For example, I thought rich people get in because they can afford coaching and mcat prep but it seems like that has nothing to do with it.

Don’t be vague, specifically what other data points do you find interesting

You also never showed that admissions were biased to wealthy students

And why is wanting to be a doctor for money a bad thing? Why should admissions try to screen that out?

 

[gyngyn]

This is not a peer-reviewed study.
It is a survey designed to generate interest in their product.

 

[Trollest]

Don’t be vague, specifically what other data points do you find interesting

You also never showed that admissions were biased to wealthy students

And why is wanting to be a doctor for money a bad thing? Why should admissions try to screen that out?

You have to be kidding.

 

[deleted480308]

You have to be kidding.

You don’t hang in the sociopolitical forum if you think I’m kidding

 

[Goro]

I found this research study shared on facebook earlier today and I'm not sure if I feel like the data is obvious or if I should feel surprised. I know most of my friends want to go to med school because of money so I guess that part is not surprising but some parts of it did surprise me, and I now feel like I won't have a strong chance because I don't come from a rich family. anyways, I thought sdn members would benefit from this data because they seem pretty interesting regarding admissions. what are your thoughts? everything obvious in there or unexpected?

US Medical School Admissions Study | SortSmart® Candidate Selection

Breaking news...water is wet.

 

[Trollest]

You don’t hang in the sociopolitical forum if you think I’m kidding

I guess the word I forgot to add here is "solely" for money.

 

[deleted480308]

I guess the word I forgot to add here is "solely" for money.

Again, why would solely for money be a reason that has to be screened for?

Why is that bad?

 

[Princeton Medical Student]

Poor students from poor families get ****ed all the time. Where is the news here?

 

[Trollest]

Again, why would solely for money be a reason that has to be screened for?

Why is that bad?

Well, the word is profit. I am pretty sure you wouldn't mind a 2 dollar screw in your knee instead of the more expensive but highly effective one because the doc want to make a profit.

 

[deleted480308]

Well, the word is profit. I am pretty sure you wouldn't mind a 2 dollar screw in your knee instead of the more expensive but highly effective one because the doc want to make a profit.

You haven’t done much business if you think the only way to make a profit is with substandard material. You can make a great profit by offering the best material

 

[doc05]

Breaking news...water is wet.

More breaking news... life isn't fair.

 

[DokterMom]

I guess not shocked about that - I'm actually not sure if I'm more shocked or think this is obvious like I said, but what i found interesting was that none of the admissions tool can filter out those that want to become doctors just for the money.

If you read what their survey question asked though, that is not what it said. Why would any bright, hard-working student with high-income potential answer "Heal and be of service even if it means to volunteer without pay" when "Heal and be of service while enjoying a lucrative career" was also on the table? Between the two, it's not a hard choice for me. At all. In fact, the question is so poorly worded that I'd suspect almost anyone who answered the former way is lying.

And they equated "One or more family members is a doctor" with "familial pressure" even when that "pressure" is sometimes negative.

 

[21Rush12]

More breaking news... life isn't fair.

Did you hear Michael Jackson died?!

 

[Goro]

Again, why would solely for money be a reason that has to be screened for?

Why is that bad?

It's off-putting. At show us some altruism.

 

[studentdoctorpremed]

guys don't shoot the messenger, i don't have any answers except for the data I see. Just enjoy and keep a healthy debate.

 

[deleted480308]

If you read what their survey question asked though, that is not what it said. Why would any bright, hard-working student with high-income potential answer "Heal and be of service even if it means to volunteer without pay". when "Heal and be of service while enjoying a lucrative career". was also on the table? Between the two, it's not a hard choice for me. At all. In fact, the question is so poorly worded that I'd suspect almost anyone who answered the former way is lying.

And they equated "One or more family members is a doctor" with "familial pressure" even when that "pressure" is sometimes negative.

the 25% is lying

It's off-putting. At show us some altruism.

but it shouldn’t be off putting

 

[Goro]

the 25% is lying

but it shouldn’t be off putting ..

But it is. /thread

 

[deleted480308]

But it is. /thread..

Which is an illogical reaction by those who are “offput”, there is nothing dishonest about doing something for money. It can absolutely still be done honestly and well

 

[Goro]

Which is an illogical reaction by those who are “offput”, there is nothing dishonest about doing something for money. It can absolutely still be done honestly and well..

When you become faculty, and join the admissions committe, then you could establish a new paradigm for what the school should look for in applicants. Until then....

 

[Master Thinker]

Honestly, the question is not worded well. I don't think most people, no matter how altruistic, would go 6 figures in debt to volunteer "without pay." With that said, as long as money is not your chief motivator, then I think that's fine and pretty normal.

 

[Welshman]

I guess the word I forgot to add here is "solely" for money.

I think the paper said "primarily" not "solely" as well

 

[Prometheus123]

If you read what their survey question asked though, that is not what it said. Why would any bright, hard-working student with high-income potential answer "Heal and be of service even if it means to volunteer without pay". when "Heal and be of service while enjoying a lucrative career". was also on the table? Between the two, it's not a hard choice for me. At all. In fact, the question is so poorly worded that I'd suspect almost anyone who answered the former way is lying.

And they equated "One or more family members is a doctor" with "familial pressure" even when that "pressure" is sometimes negative.

Thank you for pointing out how they biased the responses. That is extremely misleading.

As a former marketer, I think this is an excellent example of content marketing: create content that's informative and useful to your target audience (or at least appears to be, as in this case), build trust, then offer the supposed solution to the customers' pain points (don't worry, our magic admissions services will screen out all the bad greedy people 😉). However, as a student, I'll take this as a reminder that just because something looks evidence-based, that doesn't necessarily mean it is.

 

[Prometheus123]

That being said, just because this survey is pseudoscience doesn't mean their conclusion is completely wrong. I have not seen reliable evidence about this either way, but I think it's an interesting question. I read a newspaper article a few months ago showing applicants increased between 2006 and 2016 by ~35%. Why? I don't know, but my guess is the 2008 financial collapse made a lot of young people decide to pursue medicine because it offers high salaries and job security. If these were simpler times, maybe most of that extra 35% would be gleefully destabilizing the global economy on Wall St. instead of pretending to care about medicine and patients, since those jobs offer potentially even higher salaries, but less job security when the market goes bust. Who knows.

I don't think that it's bad to want financial security. However, I personally would prefer that the system select for those who are also intrinsically motivated towards medicine. I say that because as a patient, I don't want the doctor who doesn't really care about whether I get better, isn't curious about what's really going on with me, and is just waiting to clock out. I want the doctor who's such a nerd AND such a sweetheart that they'll really do their best to figure me out, even though my health is a lot more complicated than a board question. I've seen both, and it makes a huge difference in my experience.

The problem is, how do you select for intrinsic motivation? (Apart from this company's foolproof screening process, of course, now for the low low price of only $99,999.95) I suspect the current system of ECs and course requirements has evolved primarily as an imperfect attempt to do this. Actions speak louder than words. No one can practice medicine before becoming a doctor, so we have proxy activities to simulate different aspects of it. The system isn't perfect, but I can't think of one that's better. If anyone can, I'd be interested.

 

[deleted480308]

When you become faculty, and join the admissions committe, then you could establish a new paradigm for what the school should look for in applicants. Until then.....

A justification of the emotion would be more effective than “but we’re in charge so deal with it”. But from a practical point, I absolutely agree that the underlings have to play the game put in front of them.....it doesn’t matter if the rules to calvinball make no sense if you aren’t calvin

That being said, just because this survey is pseudoscience doesn't mean their conclusion is completely wrong. I have not seen reliable evidence about this either way, but I think it's an interesting question. I read a newspaper article a few months ago showing applicants increased between 2006 and 2016 by ~35%. Why? I don't know, but my guess is the 2008 financial collapse made a lot of young people decide to pursue medicine because it offers high salaries and job security. If these were simpler times, maybe most of that extra 35% would be gleefully destabilizing the global economy on Wall St. instead of pretending to care about medicine and patients, since those jobs offer potentially even higher salaries, but less job security when the market goes bust. Who knows.

I don't think that it's bad to want financial security. However, I personally would prefer that the system select for those who are also intrinsically motivated towards medicine. I say that because as a patient, I don't want the doctor who doesn't really care about whether I get better, isn't curious about what's really going on with me, and is just waiting to clock out. I want the doctor who's such a nerd AND such a sweetheart that they'll really do their best to figure me out, even though my health is a lot more complicated than a board question. I've seen both, and it makes a huge difference in my experience.

The problem is, how do you select for intrinsic motivation? (Apart from this company's foolproof screening process, of course, now for the low low price of only $99,999.95) I suspect the current system of ECs and course requirements has evolved primarily as an imperfect attempt to do this. Actions speak louder than words. No one can practice medicine before becoming a doctor, so we have proxy activities to simulate different aspects of it. The system isn't perfect, but I can't think of one that's better. If anyone can, I'd be interested..

I’m just as fine as a doctor who is obsessed with great outcomes so they can have a great reputation and be wealthy. I care far more about the results than the intention

 

[gyngyn]

guys don't shoot the messenger, i don't have any answers except for the data I see. Just enjoy and keep a healthy debate.

This is not data. Is is a survey designed to produce a specific outcome.
It is the opposite of reliable data.

 

[Prometheus123]

I’m just as fine as a doctor who is obsessed with great outcomes so they can have a great reputation and be wealthy. I care far more about the results than the intention.

I'm obsessed with great patient outcomes too. If we get there for different philosophical reasons, that seems just fine to me. Now, which wicket were we on...?

 

[Microbug]

I don’t understand the ? after the title... what with human involvement is not biased?

 

[Goro]

A justification of the emotion would be more effective than “but we’re in charge so deal with it”. But from a practical point, I absolutely agree that the underlings have to play the game put in front of them.....it doesn’t matter if the rules to calvinball make no sense if you aren’t calvin
I’m just as fine as a doctor who is obsessed with great outcomes so they can have a great reputation and be wealthy. I care far more about the results than the intention.

Let's just clarify....there's nothing wrong with wanting to make bank. That's the baseline for wanting to be a doctor. The real problem is having it as your sole reason for being a doctor.

 

[deleted480308]

I'm obsessed with great patient outcomes too. If we get there for different philosophical reasons, that seems just fine to me. Now, which wicket were we on...? .

Ok, so you’re now fine with the money obsessed doc as long as they view good outcomes as the avenue to their money?

We agree then

 

[deleted480308]

Let's just clarify....there's nothing wrong with wanting to make bank. That's the baseline for wanting to be a doctor. The real problem is having it as your sole reason for being a doctor..

But why is it a problem?

 

[Microbug]

But why is it a problem?.

Because that’s stupid, go into business/investment/econ and you’ll make a lot more in much shorter time...

 

[Welshman]

But why is it a problem?.

Because there are much easier ways to make bank and trying to squeeze money from people in need is* a morally poor way to make bank

 

[deleted480308]

Because that’s stupid, go into business/investment/econ and you’ll make a lot more in much shorter time....

Higher potential for millions, less “floor”. A doc can make $200k just showing up to work which isn’t true for almost any other arena

 

[deleted480308]

Because there are much easier ways to make bank and trying to squeeze money from people in need is not an morally poor way to make bank.

Please elaborate on how you won’t be cashing your checks...every doc takes money from people in need, that’s literally the deal

 

[Microbug]

Higher potential for millions, less “floor”. A doc can make $200k just showing up to work which isn’t true for almost any other arena.

Did you count the 4 yr med school, plus residency time plus med school debt...? If you go work at google you start at 150-200k our of undergrad

 

[Microbug]

Please elaborate on how you won’t be cashing your checks...every doc takes money from people in need, that’s literally the deal.

You’re starting to sound like Betsy DeVos with charter schools

 

[Welshman]

Please elaborate on how you won’t be cashing your checks...every doc takes money from people in need, that’s literally the deal.

I’m going to be cashing all of my checks lol

Im saying if making money is ones sole motivation, one isn’t inclined to take care of other people. In that case you will being doing them a disservice at least and potentially causing harm at worst (if one would push for unnecessary procedures/meds for the sake of billing), ie. a morally poor choice.

I’m also saying there are ways to make just as much money if not more with much less training and investment

 

[Goro]

But why is it a problem?.

This has been answered multiple times in multiple threads including the above, ad nauseum. I have a feeling that now you're just asking for the sake of arguing.

 

[Welshman]

You’re starting to sound like Betsy DeVos with charter schools.

I don’t think the Ron Swanson avatar was an accident haha

 

[Microbug]

I don’t think the Ron Swanson avatar was an accident haha.

Honestly never got past the first episode of that show

 

[deleted480308]

Did you count the 4 yr med school, plus residency time plus med school debt...? If you go work at google you start at 150-200k our of undergrad.

You see the line out the door at google? Not easy to get hired there...not easy to get in med school either but once you’re in you’re in

You’re starting to sound like Betsy DeVos with charter schools.

charter schools are great ideas, school vouchers are a fabulous way to give kids in crappy public schools another option

I’m going to be cashing all of my checks lol

Im saying if making money is ones sole motivation, one isn’t inclined to take care of other people. In that case you will being doing them a disservice at least and potentially causing harm at worst (if one would push for unnecessary procedures/meds for the sake of billing), ie. a morally poor choice.

I’m also saying there are ways to make just as much money if not more with much less training and investment.

this again makes you sound like you’ve never ran a business. Taking great care of customers is indeed one of the best ways to make money. It’s incorrect to automatically assume that a desire for profit has to mean dishonesty

 

[Microbug]

You see the line out the door at google? Not easy to get hired there...not easy to get in med school either but once you’re in you’re in
charter schools are great ideas, school vouchers are a fabulous way to give kids in crappy public schools another option

this again makes you sound like you’ve never ran a business. Taking great care of customers is indeed one of the best ways to make money. It’s incorrect to automatically assume that a desire for profit has to mean dishonesty ..

It’s not hard to get into google, once you know the things you need to do (just like getting into med school)