Profile Review / Biostats or Epi?

[bt27]

Hi everybody - I'm super new to this site, but have found more than a few helpful posts thus far. I'm planing on applying for biostats / epi programs this cycle with the hope of matriculating in 2021; however, I'm torn between the two fields and simply can't decide what the right path is for me. I believe I'll eventually want a PhD, but I'm aiming for Masters programs initially. Posting my profile below, and would appreciate any thoughts or comments on what seems to be the better and also more realistic fit.

Undergrad Institution: Liberal Arts, Top 50
Major(s): Natural Sciences (Biostatistics concentration)
GPA: 3.82

Type of Student: Domestic, male, two or more races

GRE General Test:
Q: 163
V: 156
W: TBD - thinking 4+ as I think my essays were solid (fingers crossed)
 

Programs Applying: Biostats or Epi (undecided) -- PhD is a stretch for sure but I'll throw a few to second tiers and below just to see what happens; realistically I'll end up at a Masters program, and I'm currently planning on applying to higher tiered schools

 

Research Experience: 1 year of research in global health epi + additional research on supervised learning methods as they apply to sports modelling; epi paper is currently under review for publication and expected to be published
Teaching Experience: tutored multivariable calculus and intro biology for a year in college

Pertinent Activities or Jobs: 2 years in consulting working across life sciences & healthcare; not too relevant, but have done a bit of machine learning work

Letters of Recommendation: one from an epidemiologist and another from a statistician (should be good); planning to get others from a manager at my company and my college career advisor

Relevant Coursework:  differential calculus, integral calculus, multivariable calculus, linear algebra, probability theory, mathematical statistics, normal model inference, nonlinear model inference, biostatistics, epidemiology, global health epidemiology, molecular biology

 

Questions:

1. Is biostats or epi a better route given my profile? I really can't decide and like both fields equally as is.

2. Is it realistic to go for a PhD in biostats given an average quant GRE score and a lack of real analysis? I know that it's almost impossible to gain admittance to public health PhDs off the bat, so not considering that a viable option

 

Appreciate any advice you may have, and thanks for taking the time!

[bayessays]

For biostat PhDs, your GRE Q is a little lower than ideal but not disqualifying, and it would be better if you had real analysis but you otherwise have a decent math background if you have A/A-s in those classes.  From experience on this board and in real life, I do think under-represented minority status can help you out if that's the case for you.  I think your exact grades in those math classes and whether you are a URM will give a clearer picture of what range of schools to apply for.

I think you should apply for some biostat PhDs outside the top 10 (ie, outside the top 40 on US News).  Do you have any particular schools in mind?

As for whether you should do biostat or epidemiology, that really depends on what you're interested in.  Epidemiology is much more specialized, and most epidemiologists don't specialize in statistics and finish graduate school with about the amount of statistics training that you already have.  You can be a professor in a tougher job market (fewer public health schools) or become a public health professsional.  Biostat will leave a lot more career options - professor, pharma, tech, finance, anything that involves numbers really.  If you enjoy math and are undecided, biostat is probably the safer and more lucrative career option.

[bt27]

Appreciate the response here - this is really helpful. As for the biostats PhDs I'd look to apply, I'd say the following schools:

• Boston U
• Tulane
• Pitt
• UT Houston 
• South Carolina

Thoughts on these? For Masters programs I'd aim for Harvard, JHU, Berkeley, etc. 

[justarandomguy]

If you decide on biostatistics, do note that some PhD programs automatically consider you for the masters program if you get rejected from the PhD. So it's like a 2-for-1 deal. The ones that did last cycle were Minnesota, Columbia, and UCLA (although you'll want to be sure that these programs will still do this). There are probably other programs as well.

You also have a ton of time left to improve your apps. Plenty of time to study and re-take the GRE and improve that quant score. I would focus on this early so you can get it off your back. You can also take real analysis online in the fall. Harvard Extension School, for instance, offers it (they haven't released the courses yet but they always do in the fall, check back here in a month or so https://www.extension.harvard.edu/course-catalog/courses). You won't have the grades back at the time of application but that's ok. Write that you're enrolled in the course in your SOP and let them know that you took it once you decided to pursue a biostat PhD. Then, immediately when grades are released see if you can update your application with the new transcripts. And if you can afford it right now, paying to take this course is well-worth it if it means you can go straight to a Phd rather than Masters then Phd. The cost of a masters + the opportunity cost is several orders magnitude higher than the cost of this one course.

[justarandomguy]

Also I wanted to note that even though most epi people don't specialize in statistics, you could if you wanted to, though it might be a little more difficult. I'm not sure if the lack of statistics oriented epidemiologists is due to lack of demand or supply. Some great statisticians, e.g. Sander Greenland, are in epi departments.

[bayessays]

2 hours ago, bt27 said:

Appreciate the response here - this is really helpful. As for the biostats PhDs I'd look to apply, I'd say the following schools:

• Boston U
• Tulane
• Pitt
• UT Houston 
• South Carolina

Thoughts on these? For Masters programs I'd aim for Harvard, JHU, Berkeley, etc. 

From what I've seen on this forum, Boston U is way more competitive than its ranking suggests.  I've seen people who got into top 5 programs and then rejected at Boston.  Same for Pitt.  I think the other 3 are reasonable for sure though.  As the above poster said, if there's any way you could get your Q score up a couple points I think it could really help.

[bt27]

35 minutes ago, bayessays said:

From what I've seen on this forum, Boston U is way more competitive than its ranking suggests.  I've seen people who got into top 5 programs and then rejected at Boston.  Same for Pitt.  I think the other 3 are reasonable for sure though.  As the above poster said, if there's any way you could get your Q score up a couple points I think it could really help.

Gotcha - what about if I just went for masters with these scores? Do you think top schools are possible given the rest of my profile? Really don't think it's worth putting more hours into the GRE for marginally higher scores tbh. Also, if I'm a betting man, covid could potentially derail standardized tests this next year; of course, that's just speculation, but seems like it's inevitable if there's a second wave.

[bayessays]

That totally makes sense.  I'm not super familiar with master's programs and am not really sure how competitive the top ones are.  I know Michigan is not super competitive, but I think Harvard/JHU might be a stretch.  Look through the https://www.thegradcafe.com/survey page at the programs you're interested and look at the stats of the rejected American MS students.

[StatsG0d]

6 hours ago, bayessays said:

From what I've seen on this forum, Boston U is way more competitive than its ranking suggests.  I've seen people who got into top 5 programs and then rejected at Boston.  Same for Pitt.  I think the other 3 are reasonable for sure though.  As the above poster said, if there's any way you could get your Q score up a couple points I think it could really help.

I guess it can vary widely. I know someone who had only taken Calc I-III and linear algebra, had a similar GRE to the OP, applied to Pitt and got waitlisted for the PhD (ultimately decided to do a funded master's elsewhere).

I think if the OP took real analysis and got an A- or better, they would greatly improve their chances at a top-10 biostats, especially the less theoretical programs (e.g., Pitt and Emory). IMO, a 163+ is sufficient to at least not get auto-rejected. Granted, a better score wouldn't hurt, but I doubt it would matter in the long run.

[bt27]

17 hours ago, StatsG0d said:

I guess it can vary widely. I know someone who had only taken Calc I-III and linear algebra, had a similar GRE to the OP, applied to Pitt and got waitlisted for the PhD (ultimately decided to do a funded master's elsewhere).

I think if the OP took real analysis and got an A- or better, they would greatly improve their chances at a top-10 biostats, especially the less theoretical programs (e.g., Pitt and Emory). IMO, a 163+ is sufficient to at least not get auto-rejected. Granted, a better score wouldn't hurt, but I doubt it would matter in the long run.

Thanks for the input - this is encouraging:) I think I'll take my chances with the GRE score, as I hate ETS and do not want to feed their money making machine any longer. Definitely will look into taking analysis in the fall!