What are the differences in DO vs. MD admission requirements?

[814965]

1. There don't seem to be any recent threads that just simply and directly say what these differences are, such as that some DO schools require a Letter of Recommendation from a DO physician. Are there any other requirements that differ between the two? do DO schools require more substantial community service experience than MD schools?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Mwooster]

1. There don't seem to be any recent threads that just simply and directly say what these differences are, such as that some DO schools require a Letter of Recommendation from a DO physician. Are there any other requirements that differ between the two? do DO schools require more substantial community service experience than MD schools?

This has potential to turn into a MD vs DO flame war.

 

[814965]

This has potential to turn into a MD vs DO flame war.

Lol I'm honestly just curious what the differences are for DO because I'm potentially going to have to reapply and there doesn't really seem to be a simple, straightforward list of what requirements DO schools have that MD schools don't.

 

[LoveBeingHuman:)]

It's not so much that the requirements differ. It's more about the mission of the school. A school with a heavy community based mission will tend favorably towards students that have a lot of community service. A top MD school with tend towards students with accomplishments in research. Therefore, you can't make an MD/DO generalization.

 

[libertyyne]

Lol I'm honestly just curious what the differences are for DO because I'm potentially going to have to reapply and there doesn't really seem to be a simple, straightforward list of what requirements DO schools have that MD schools don't.

DO schools on average have a lower GPA and MCAT for acceptees compared to MD schools.
This very rough numbers are DO 3.6~ish 27 ~ VS MD 3.7~ish 32.
DO schools also like to see DO specific shadowing and LOR.
DO schools tend to be more holistic in applicant review.

 

[femmegoblue]

1. There don't seem to be any recent threads that just simply and directly say what these differences are, such as that some DO schools require a Letter of Recommendation from a DO physician. Are there any other requirements that differ between the two? do DO schools require more substantial community service experience than MD schools?

There are many schools that specifically require a DO LOR, or if they don't require it they "highly recommend it". In terms of class requirements, there aren't any hard and fast differences. You have to look at each school independently, same as MD. If you think you need to reapply and include DO I would suggest shadowing a DO yesterday and getting an LOR.

 

[814965]

DO schools on average have a lower GPA and MCAT for acceptees compared to MD schools.
This very rough numbers are DO 3.6~ish 27 ~ VS MD 3.7~ish 32.
DO schools also like to see DO specific shadowing and LOR.
DO schools tend to be more holistic in applicant review.

Do their matriculants have on average a lot more community service volunteering?

 

[ciestar]

Do their matriculants have on average a lot more community service volunteering?

I think DO applicants have more of less the same ECs.

You absolutely should have sufficient nonclinical volunteering on your application, it does have importance.

 

[libertyyne]

Do their matriculants have on average a lot more community service volunteering?

Neither group publishes that info for comparison.

 

[psu228]

Do their matriculants have on average a lot more community service volunteering?

I don't think you can make that generalization. DO schools want to see that you have experience with osteopathic physicians and/or a commitment to underserved communities as many DO schools have specific missions of offering healthcare to certain geographic areas. So while you can't say that DO matricualants have more community service hours, you could maybe make the argument that said hours are more valuable for a prospective DO than it would be for an MD applicant.

 

[libertyyne]

I don't think you can make that generalization. DO schools want to see that you have experience with osteopathic physicians and/or a commitment to underserved communities as many DO schools have specific missions of offering healthcare to certain geographic areas. So while you can't say that DO matricualants have more community service hours, you could maybe make the argument that said hours are more valuable for a prospective DO than it would be for an MD applicant.

The same argument could be made for numerous mission driven MD schools. I don't think you can make it on the basis of mission alone. I do think that statistically speaking there are more LizzyM 55-65 score candidates so diffrenciating yourself in that score range requires more impactful ECS . So do schools might be getting some candidates with those characteristics. That being said , most state MD schools are probably open to candidates with exceptional ECS as well considering their lizzym medians can dip into mid to low 60s.

 

[psu228]

The same argument could be made for numerous mission driven MD schools. I don't think you can make it on the basis of mission alone. I do think that statistically speaking there are more LizzyM 55-65 score candidates so diffrenciating yourself in that score range requires more impactful ECS . So do schools might be getting some candidates with those characteristics. That being said , most state MD schools are probably open to candidates with exceptional ECS as well considering their lizzym medians can dip into mid to low 60s.

Yea for sure, I'm not trying to say ECs don't matter for MD at all. Honestly OP the one thing I think you can say for certain difference wise is that DO schools want to see that you know what osteopathic physicians are and have spent time with them in clinical settings. They don't want to just be a back up option for

The same argument could be made for numerous mission driven MD schools. I don't think you can make it on the basis of mission alone. I do think that statistically speaking there are more lizzyM 55-65 score candidates so diffrenciating yourself in that score range requires more impactful ECS . So do schools might be getting some candidates with those characteristics. That being said , most state MD schools are probably open to candidates with exceptional ECS as well considering their lizzym medians can dip into mid to low 60s.

For sure, I'm certainly not trying to portray MD matriculants as not having good ECs!

OP I think one difference in admissions could be the importance most DO schools put on having spent time with an osteopathic physician. Obviously you need tons of clinical exposure for MD schools, but many DO schools require a letter of reccomend action from a DO to even apply, and a lot more "strongly reccomend" a DO LoR. DO schools don't want to just be a hopeful MDs back up, they want to see that you know what osteopathic physicians are.

 

[Lawpy]

Additionally GPA Calculation

AMCAS/MD calculates science as BCPM = so Bio Chem Physics and Math
AACOMAS/DO calculates science = all sciences but not Math

why is math not listed as science for AACOMAS? even some schools apparently view math letters as non-science, and i fail to see why.

do such adcoms, schools, regulatory bodies etc. define science as anything biomedical? because statistics, a math course widely praised by adcoms here, is clearly a science given its nature, but AACOMAS and some schools view it as non-science despite having critical applications in biomedical research?

 

[Goro]

In addition,

Median MD acceptee stats:
GPA: 3.7
MCAT: 31 (old exam)/510 (new)

Median DO: ~3.4
Mediant MCAT ~501
There are ~5-6 DO schools whose median stats equal or overlap those of some MD schools.

DO schools are less anal about committee LORs and research as well

DO schools on average have a lower GPA and MCAT for acceptees compared to MD schools.
This very rough numbers are DO 3.6~ish 27 ~ VS MD 3.7~ish 32.
DO schools also like to see DO specific shadowing and LOR.
DO schools tend to be more holistic in applicant review.

 

[Lawpy]

DO schools tend to be more holistic in applicant review.

what does this even mean? because i'm pretty sure top schools are incredibly holistic seeing that they have a large supply of extremely well qualified applicants and have to make decisions based on arbitrary criteria of fit.

if holistic means less focused on stats, that's not true because the strong DO schools are addicted to high MCAT scores to boost their matriculant medians. that's why CCOM, KCUMB, Touros aren't usually recommended to those with sub-500 MCAT scores.

 

[libertyyne]

what does this even mean? because i'm pretty sure top schools are incredibly holistic seeing that they have a large supply of extremely well qualified applicants and have to make decisions based on arbitrary criteria of fit.

if holistic means less focused on stats, that's not true because the strong DO schools are addicted to high MCAT scores to boost their matriculant medians. that's why CCOM, KCUMB, Touros aren't usually recommended to those with sub-500 MCAT scores.

Let's be clear , the number ***** MD schools are about as holistic as McDonald's. Being holistic and having a median of 38 is an oxymoron.
Do schools especially the middle of the pack tend to even give a 3.1 gpa a chance if other stuff is lining up not a whole lot of MD schools entertaining a 3.1 gpa as a candidate.some Do schools will allow you to sub a work LOR for a science professor one if you are a non traditional . They are more relaxed about certain things and understand that life happens. Heck they even had grade replacement until recently. BCOM was asking applicants to send in videos in Lieu of secondary essays.
Some MD schools are holistic once you meet their screening criteria or if you have the numbers,these are schools with lower medians. DOs seem to be more flexible with those thresholds and requirements .

 

[Lawpy]

Let's be clear , the number ***** MD schools are about as holistic as McDonald's. Being holistic and having a median of 38 is an oxymoron.
Do schools especially the middle of the pack tend to even give a 3.1 gpa a chance if other stuff is lining up not a whole lot of MD schools entertaining a 3.1 gpa as a candidate.some Do schools will allow you to sub a work LOR for a science professor one if you are a non traditional . They are more relaxed about certain things and understand that life happens. Heck they even had grade replacement until recently. BCOM was asking applicants to send in videos in Lieu of secondary essays.
Some MD schools are holistic once you meet their screening criteria or if you have the numbers,these are schools with lower medians. DOs seem to be more flexible with those thresholds and requirements .

But it is possible to get into top schools with a low GPA provided sustained upward GPA trends were met and supplemented with good MCAT score. This is due to competition and selectivity. LOR requirements are school specific so i can't address that.

DO schools being flexible with low GPA/low MCAT and other requirements isn't due to their being holistic. It's due to a much less competitive applicant pool applying to those schools. MD schools emphasize holistic review when trying to get the best possible class, so if anything, i would argue MD schools are actually more holistic than DO schools because of a much more competitive pool where nuances and arbitrary criteria like fit begin to matter.

I also read somewhere that an applicant's narrative that's cogently expressed in essays, applications, and interviews is very much important for top schools. So this illustrates that MD schools emphasize holistic review of applicants and high median stats are due to competition and selectivity pressures

 

[libertyyne]

But it is possible to get into top schools with a low GPA provided sustained upward GPA trends were met and supplemented with good MCAT score. This is due to competition and selectivity. LOR requirements are school specific so i can't address that.

DO schools being flexible with low GPA/low MCAT and other requirements isn't due to their being holistic. It's due to a much less competitive applicant pool applying to those schools. MD schools emphasize holistic review when trying to get the best possible class, so if anything, i would argue MD schools are actually more holistic than DO schools because of a much more competitive pool where nuances and arbitrary criteria like fit begin to matter.

I also read somewhere that an applicant's narrative that's cogently expressed in essays, applications, and interviews is very much important for top schools. So this illustrates that MD schools emphasize holistic review of applicants and high median stats are due to competition and selectivity pressures

I am unsure how you would perform anything but lip service to holistic review with MCATs medians of 38 and gpa medians of 3.9. just by creating a class with those medians you are limiting the pool of applicants you will review to a small number of people considering the small population that actually has those scores.
DO schools on the other hand are not burdened by such constraints . Having a less competitive pool means it's a larger pool to choose from based on the score distributions in a bayesian LizzyM distribution. Some top MD schools discourage community college credits and other will not accept pre-reqs older then a set limit. All of these criteria are against the concept of supposed holistic review. These top schools also tend to fill their classes from graduates of t 20 undergrads once again empirical evidence to the contrary.
Look at the msar , most top schools have gpa and sgpa 10 the percentiles above 3.5. hardly sounds holistic. 90+ percent with research experience hardly sounds holistic.

 

[Lawpy]

I am unsure how you would perform anything but lip service to holistic review with MCATs medians of 38 and gpa medians of 3.9. just by creating a class with those medians you are limiting the pool of applicants you will review to a small number of people considering the small population that actually has those scores.
DO schools on the other hand are not burdened by such constraints . Having a less competitive pool means it's a larger pool to choose from based on the score distributions in a bayesian LizzyM distribution. Some top MD schools discourage community college credits and other will not accept pre-reqs older then a set limit. All of these criteria are against the concept of supposed holistic review. These top schools also tend to fill their classes from graduates of t 20 undergrads once again empirical evidence to the contrary.
Look at the msar , most top schools have gpa and sgpa 10 the percentiles above 3.5. hardly sounds holistic. 90+ percent with research experience hardly sounds holistic.

But these top schools still need to decide what applicants to select for interviews and admissions. And with the applicant pool for these schools uniformly consisting of high stats, other things like EC quality and narrative matter a lot. So these schools end up holistically evaluating these applicants.

DO schools are more flexible with a larger and less competitive pool because they benefit from applicant volume (secondary fees, interview fees, nonrefundable deposits etc). So they are more willing to overlook some deficiencies. But this is also true for state schools and lower tiers that don't benefit as much from applicant volume as DO schools (MD schools don't have nonrefundable deposits). That's why SMPs can be valuable to show reinvention.

Imposing strict requirements in response to competition doesn't make the schools less holistic. It just acts as a filter to help select applicants that the schools are looking for.

 

[libertyyne]

But these top schools still need to decide what applicants to select for interviews and admissions. And with the applicant pool for these schools uniformly consisting of high stats, other things like EC quality and narrative matter a lot. So these schools end up holistically evaluating these applicants.

DO schools are more flexible with a larger and less competitive pool because they benefit from applicant volume (secondary fees, interview fees, nonrefundable deposits etc). So they are more willing to overlook some deficiencies. But this is also true for state schools and lower tiers that don't benefit as much from applicant volume as DO schools (MD schools don't have nonrefundable deposits).

Imposing strict requirements in response to competition doesn't make the schools less holistic. It just acts as a filter to help select applicants that the schools are looking for.

It by definition makes them less holistic by creating artificial thresholds.

Libertyyne school of medicine performs holistic review of applicants for a class. My SOMs median MCAT is 45 tho.

 

[Lawpy]

It by definition makes them less holistic by creating artificial thresholds.

Libertyyne school of medicine performs holistic review of applicants for a class. My SOMs median MCAT is 45 tho.

In response to competition. But there are more applicants with high stats than there are seats at top schools. To get in, an overall review of the application is needed.

I just don't think DO schools are more holistic than MD schools just because they are flexible with requirements due to less competitive applicant pools. Holistic review is needed either way when making admissions decisions.

 

[hungrybox]

in on roll bread

 

[CCmetal94]

In addition,

Median MD acceptee stats:
GPA: 3.7
MCAT: 31 (old exam)/510 (new)

Median DO: ~3.4
Mediant MCAT ~501
There are ~5-6 DO schools whose median stats equal or overlap those of some MD schools.

DO schools are less anal about committee LORs and research as well

Just to add a little more accuracy to this. Median DO gpa: 3.53 and MCAT: 27.33 (so more like a 503 on the new exam if i'm not mistaken). But your right about overlap. My state DO school has a 3.67/507 average for 2016.
Source: http://www.aacom.org/docs/default-source/data-and-trends/2015_mat.pdf?sfvrsn=8

 

[814965]

Do they really care that much about shadowing? I have over 2000 hours clinical experience from other experiences.

 

[libertyyne]

Do they really care that much about shadowing? I have over 2000 hours clinical experience from other experiences.

You need to articulate why DO. This is preferably done by shadowing a DO physician. Ideally observing them use OMM.

 

[femmegoblue]

Do they really care that much about shadowing? I have over 2000 hours clinical experience from other experiences.

Um, yes. If you don't shadow a DO you really have no way of showing you are interested in a DO program. You can say things all you want in your PS but if your app reads extremely like "DO as a backup", it's not the best.

 

[JohnWill30]

While shadowing a DO and or getting a DO LOR will definitely help you for schools it is not absolutely necessary for schools, even ones that say "highly recommended." I applied to a DO school with no DO shadowing experience but articulated how the work I am doing in my gap year is in line with DO "philosophy" and it seemed to do the trick with an acceptance. n=1 take it with a grain of salt.

 

[814965]

While shadowing a DO and or getting a DO LOR will definitely help you for schools it is not absolutely necessary for schools, even ones that say "highly recommended." I applied to a DO school with no DO shadowing experience but articulated how the work I am doing in my gap year is in line with DO "philosophy" and it seemed to do the trick with an acceptance. n=1 take it with a grain of salt.

That was my thinking, and with my ECs I could definitely spin it that way. I know MDs I could shadow but no DOs, but I work at a hospital and get to see what both do for 8 hours a day, every day.

 

[femmegoblue]

While shadowing a DO and or getting a DO LOR will definitely help you for schools it is not absolutely necessary for schools, even ones that say "highly recommended." I applied to a DO school with no DO shadowing experience but articulated how the work I am doing in my gap year is in line with DO "philosophy" and it seemed to do the trick with an acceptance. n=1 take it with a grain of salt.

Point is, you have to be able to relate SOMETHING you did to DO degree/philosophy, even if it's small. I'm just saying the shadowing really does help to do this.

 

[efle]

It by definition makes them less holistic by creating artificial thresholds.

I tend to think of it as holistic review kicking in at a later step. Even the notoriously number driven places holding top 1-2% MCAT medians and straight A GPAs are interviewing 2-4x as many people as they will offer admits to. Determining which people to admit will be the holistic step there, where other schools (e.g. UCSF, UCLA) will start to be holistic at the level of their secondaries, and many schools will start at the level of interview invites.

 

[Goro]

Jeeze, those numbers have gone up! Your state school would have a LizzyM score of ~66-67, which is breathing down the neck of Drexel, and IIRC is > Mercer!

Just to add a little more accuracy to this. Median DO gpa: 3.53 and MCAT: 27.33 (so more like a 503 on the new exam if i'm not mistaken). But your right about overlap. My state DO school has a 3.67/507 average for 2016.
Source: http://www.aacom.org/docs/default-source/data-and-trends/2015_mat.pdf?sfvrsn=8

Shadowing a DO shows due diligence that you're really interested in the profession. Those that can discern differences between the way DOs and MDs practice get bonus points. NOT finding a DO to shadow in a DO-rich area like the Midwest or East Coast can hurt you, especially if you live near a DO school. For example, if someone live on Long Island and can't be bothered to go visit NYITCOM, I cast a very leery eye on them.

Do they really care that much about shadowing? I have over 2000 hours clinical experience from other experiences.

While shadowing a DO and or getting a DO LOR will definitely help you for schools it is not absolutely necessary for schools, even ones that say "highly recommended." I applied to a DO school with no DO shadowing experience but articulated how the work I am doing in my gap year is in line with DO "philosophy" and it seemed to do the trick with an acceptance. n=1 take it with a grain of salt.

 

[libertyyne]

I tend to think of it as holistic review kicking in at a later step. Even the notoriously number driven places holding top 1-2% MCAT medians and straight A GPAs are interviewing 2-4x as many people as they will offer admits to. Determining which people to admit will be the holistic step there, where other schools (e.g. UCSF, UCLA) will start to be holistic at the level of their secondaries, and many schools will start at the level of interview invites.

I am not arguing against that, however DO schools by definition are more holistic then because they are even holistic about the numbers. Don't let lip service fool you, if holism in all aspects would be practiced you wouldn't be getting median MCATs in the 38 range.

 

[WedgeDawg]

I am not arguing against that, however DO schools by definition are more holistic then because they are even holistic about the numbers. Don't let lip service fool you, if holism in all aspects would be practiced you wouldn't be getting median MCATs in the 38 range.

Holistic doesn't mean that stats are suddenly unimportant, it just means that everything else is important too. Holistic application review and stats mattering are not mutually exclusive. There is nothing about the world 'holistic' that means diminished threshold. Being "holistic about the numbers" doesn't make sense. I think a better way to express what you're trying to say is "taking into account the context behind the numbers" which I think even top schools do. People (very few, granted) get into schools like Yale with a sub-30 MCAT because of certain scenarios and end up doing great. It just so happens that people who have the situation that would 'excuse' (for lack of a better word) these low stats tend to have good stats (on the GPA end, the MCAT end, or both) anyway. Finally, if top schools were entirely stats driven, they could fill their class a couple times over entirely with people who have a 39+ MCAT. That's why schools like Hopkins and UCSF have median MCATs of 36 instead of 40. Even WashU, with their monster 38 median, could be higher. High stats might get you an interview at WashU (they interview 1/4 of their applicants), but it does not in any way guarantee an acceptance.

 

[libertyyne]

Holistic doesn't mean that stats are suddenly unimportant, it just means that everything else is important too. Holistic application review and stats mattering are not mutually exclusive. There is nothing about the world 'holistic' that means diminished threshold. Being "holistic about the numbers" doesn't make sense. I think a better way to express what you're trying to say is "taking into account the context behind the numbers" which I think even top schools do. People (very few, granted) get into schools like Yale with a sub-30 MCAT because of certain scenarios and end up doing great. It just so happens that people who have the situation that would 'excuse' (for lack of a better word) these low stats tend to have good stats (on the GPA end, the MCAT end, or both) anyway. Finally, if top schools were entirely stats driven, they could fill their class a couple times over entirely with people who have a 39+ MCAT. That's why schools like Hopkins and UCSF have median MCATs of 36 instead of 40. Even WashU, with their monster 38 median, could be higher. High stats might get you an interview at WashU (they interview 1/4 of their applicants), but it does not in any way guarantee an acceptance.

The only issue with that line of reasoning is that even after "taking into account the context behind numbers" these schools have high medians and 10th percentiles above 3.5. What that shows me is that they are either full of it when they say they the context of the numbers into account.

 

[efle]

What that shows me is that they are either full of it when they say they the context of the numbers into account.

Or, they have a very narrow definition of what excuses low numbers! Maybe Top School A will overlook a bad freshman/sophomore year if there is an upward trend afterwards, while Top School B will only share that view if there was a clear reason for the start to be so rough, like being first generation to college out of a terrible childhood school system. School B might have higher 10th numbers because far fewer meet that description, but both can still be said to holistically consider academics.

^Purely conjecture

 

[WedgeDawg]

The only issue with that line of reasoning is that even after "taking into account the context behind numbers" these schools have high medians and 10th percentiles above 3.5. What that shows me is that they are either full of it when they say they the context of the numbers into account.

The 10th percentile at many of these schools is ~32 (range is 34 at WashU to like 29-30 at UCLA). If we assume a median of 36.5, that means 40% of their class has scores of 32-36. Why would they accept all these 33s and 34s over people with 38s and 39s?

Additionally, there are not that many people that have a good excuse for having a mediocre academic record. I'm talking like people who couldn't speak english before they turned 14. If you weren't a great student, but you have great ECs, what makes you a better applicant than someone who was academically exceptional and also had great ECs?

The people who have 3.9/38 and very bad ECs are not the people getting into schools like Stanford, Yale, and Duke. The people who have the whole package are. There are just so many applicants who truly have great numbers, great ECs, and great essays/letters that top schools don't have reason to consider someone who drops the ball in one area or another without a very good reason.

 

[libertyyne]

The 10th percentile at many of these schools is ~32 (range is 34 at WashU to like 29-30 at UCLA). If we assume a median of 36.5, that means 40% of their class has scores of 32-36. Why would they accept all these 33s and 34s over people with 38s and 39s?

Additionally, there are not that many people that have a good excuse for having a mediocre academic record. I'm talking like people who couldn't speak english before they turned 14. If you weren't a great student, but you have great ECs, what makes you a better applicant than someone who was academically exceptional and also had great ECs?

The people who have 3.9/38 and very bad ECs are not the people getting into schools like Stanford, Yale, and Duke. The people who have the whole package are. There are just so many applicants who truly have great numbers, great ECs, and great essays/letters that top schools don't have reason to consider someone who drops the ball in one area or another without a very good reason.

Would you say they are less understanding about some bad grades or a bad MCAT performance regardless of the context?

 

[WedgeDawg]

Would you say they are less understanding about some bad grades or a bad MCAT performance regardless of the context?

I don't know - anything I answer would be speculation and probably unfounded

 

[787593]

1. There don't seem to be any recent threads that just simply and directly say what these differences are, such as that some DO schools require a Letter of Recommendation from a DO physician. Are there any other requirements that differ between the two? do DO schools require more substantial community service experience than MD schools?

MD is definitely more holistic in the review process.








Hehehe

 

[SwordOfTheMorning]

Do they really care that much about shadowing? I have over 2000 hours clinical experience from other experiences.

I had zero DO shadowing or LORs and received invites to the only two DO schools I applied to. I didn't attend the interviews so I don't know if I would've been accepted. n=1, but I don't think you'll be at a huge disadvantage if you don't shadow but have a lot of clinical experiences already.

 

[libertyyne]

I don't know - anything I answer would be speculation and probably unfounded

Looking at their ranges and medians it seems like they demand excellence, but what do I know.

 

[WedgeDawg]

Looking at their ranges and medians it seems like they demand excellence, but what do I know.

I would say they expect excellence, and how they choose to define excellence is up to the school.

 

[efle]

Looking at their ranges and medians it seems like they demand excellence, but what do I know.

Also remember a tenth percentile is a tenth percentile. Think about what fraction of a medical class was likely to have had major obstacles/inexperience when entering college, the type you'd want to see forgiven for their early low grades. I'm going to guess it's less than 1 in 10. I'll bet your theoretical strong-ECs person who had good context to (temporarily) drop the stats ball still stands a good chance at a lot of top schools, they're just a very small minority drowned out by all the 3.6+/33+ people with great ECs.

 

[814965]

I guess I'll play their game and shadow then...