elsewhere123

I'm a little confused on what your goal is. You say that your interest is in HIV and cancer, but that seems to have very little to do with clinical psychology? Are you interested in helping to psychologically counsel individuals suffering from HIV and cancer? Or are you hoping to help lessen the spread/impact of these diseases? Do you currently work with HIV/cancer patients as a clinical psychologist...? I suspect your posting may get more responses if you can clarify why you hope to do in the future, as that will significantly inform which program is a better fit for you!

Given that a lot of MPH programs seem to value a decent quant score, in my humble opinion I would say go with the second score. Your verbal is almost the same, but the difference in the quant is significant. I've been to a few MPH info sessions for different schools, and I hear a lot of the admissions officers say that they want to see higher quant scores than most people are sending in. Hope this helps!

Hey guys, I am a recent college grad with a major in Neuroscience and I am hoping to apply for a master's in either biostatistics or biomedical informatics. A little bit about me: 1) I've held a bunch of different research positions since high school, and from my experience, academic research is a lonely and often very frustrating land. I'm a fairly outgoing person and I love collaborative projects, which is why I also haven't ruled out getting an MBA at some point down the line. But I like the idea of being the scientist/programmer that works with the MBA types, rather than the MBA type myself, because I am nerdy and generally just like the science of it a lot more. 2) My background is mostly in history/neuroscience, but I have taken some stats (standard probability and theoretical inference sequence) and know R. I am less comfortable with non-R computer programming, but am able and willing to learn. I am currently working in a biomedical informatics lab at Harvard, and I LOVED the stats courses that I took in undergrad! 3) I generally like practical applications more than theory and abstraction. My worst nightmare would be to get stuck in a highly theoretical program filled with uninterested professors who would rather focus on their own research than mentor grad students (especially masters), and to be taking a heavy theoretical course load without a sense of the "why" behind it all. As in, how will I be able to use this course to build a better product for an exciting new company, or to help solve a global health challenge? 4) I like to see direct results. After graduation my ideal job would be at a startup like those in the Rock Health fund, or Flatiron Health or another upcoming digital health company. I think this stuff is awesome. My concern is that I don't have enough CS background to excel in informatics, but that biostatistics MS grads wind up either in academia or running clinical trials for a giant pharma company, which doesn't exactly get me going in the morning. Any thoughts on what (if any) programs might be a good fit? Programs I am considering: Columbia - MS in Biostatistics, MA in Biomedical Informatics Duke - MS in Biostatistics Harvard - MS in Biostatistics, MS in Biomedical Informatics Johns Hopkins - MS in Biostatistics, MS in Health Sciences Informatics Mt Sinai Icahn School of Medicine - MS in Biomedical Informatics UC Berkeley - MA in Biostatistics UCLA - MS in Biostatistics U. Michigan - MS in Health Informatics U. Penn - MS in Biostatistics U. Washington - MS in Biostatistics Vanderbilt - MS in Biomedical Informatics Weill Cornell - MS in Health Informatics Yale - "MS in Public Health in the Biostatistics Track" (yes - that is what they call it) These programs are all extremely different, and after tons of research and even some Open House visits I am still not sure which would be a good fit! Would appreciate any advice, or general comments from anyone who has experience with the programs listed above. Thank you so much!