-
The 2026-2027 MD School Specific Threads are now live in the School Specific Discussions forum. The 2025-2026 cycle threads can be found here. -
Scholarship Access: Becoming a Student Doctor course
Free access to comprehensive medical school prep. Eligible students include AAMC FAP recipients and HS graduates from underserved areas. Apply today.
Statistics confusion
Started by 700003
I can't imagine that it wouldn't. Either course should suffice, but I would personally elect to take biostatistics because of the biological applications that are taught in it.
Biostatistics would almost universally be preferred because of its relevance to biological and medical sciences.
Biostats is certainly equivalent, arguably better.
Probably. When I was an undergrad, Math stats was identical to Bio stats. Identical course # too. (Math 353 vs Bio 353). Mind you, this was back in the Pleistocene.
It won't help on the MCAT but biostats will be vital for research and will be looked upon favorably at schools that require research in medical school.
I luv stats. Only math course I enjoyed.( On a TI-84)
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
In my opinion, having a theoretical basis for the stuff you do in statistics is incredibly important. You have to know what you don't know - things break. People can get into trouble fast if they are mindlessly Chi-Squaring and T-testing away, let alone interpreting a logistic regression.
That said, if you are going to be an MD and just don't care about the math, it's probably better to work with your University's stats consulting service.
I took statistics through my math department and it was rigorous and difficult. Most of my friends took stats through some other department like psychology or criminal justice and they practically handed out As. I think math departments as a whole are more stingy with the As and the non-math stats are bound to be easy. I would wager many of them were created so that departments students didn't have to get tripped up in stats through the math department.
You're on a pre-med forum dude. We don't care about the math.
What a great attitude!
Most of the full time researchers I've worked with end up bringing in statisticians these days, let alone MDs doing research on the side. I'll happily defer to somebody with more expertise if it means I won't get bogged down in stats mumbo jumbo, but I agree that the trick is knowing when you don't know enough.
I have a friend getting a doctorate in health economics and he's always getting driven up the walls by MDs writing papers who don't know why their statistical methods are invalid.
Either will suffice, biostats might be more applicable an might be taught in a more user friendly manner. Keep in mind that even if you don't do research you will be a consumer of research studies and you will need to read those studies with a critical eye to determine if the results are externally valid, if the results obtained in the study sample can be applied to your patient(s). Evidence based medicine doesn't mean swallowing every research study tha comes down the pike but being dicerning and discarding the dreck.
If anyone questions your research, a stats course allows you to shut them down by telling them that the p-values are <0.0001.
I agree wholeheartedly!
If you can understand how to really read a paper you will not be "that doc" who is fooled into believing the "conclusions of the authors" when their own data does not support them. This is priceless.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
