PhD vs. DrPH vs. MPH

[Chrish0204]

Hey all, I'm seeking some advice about entering public health. I am considering applying for some sort of public health program in the next few years but I am not sure what is right for me. I have a couple of questions:

1) Do many people start with an MPH and then go on to get a PhD? Would this be a waste of time and would I be better off just going straight for a PhD, or is there some value in getting an MPH first?

2) What are the pros and cons of a PhD vs. a DrPH? I realize that the former is more research-focused and the other is more "practice" oriented, but what does this translate into as far as jobs go? Is choosing one or the other going to significantly alter my job prospects, or is there some blurring of the lines, so to speak? Are there any types of jobs you simply can't get with a PhD that you can get with a DrPH, and vice versa?

3) Is the DrPH degree respected / valued in the public health community? In my own field (nursing) there is a practice doctorate as well (DNP), but it is controversial and some people do not respect that degree (with some good reasons). I have heard of PA doctorate degrees that do not significantly improve clinical skills and mostly just focus on "fluff." Is the DrPH seen as a light-weight degree that is the result of "degree inflation", or is it truly challenging and respected?

4) If anyone here applied for / is applying to a DrPH or PhD, can you explain the reasons you chose one over the other?

Thanks for anyone that can answer any of these questions.

[Stories]

Hey all, I'm seeking some advice about entering public health. I am considering applying for some sort of public health program in the next few years but I am not sure what is right for me. I have a couple of questions:

1) Do many people start with an MPH and then go on to get a PhD? Would this be a waste of time and would I be better off just going straight for a PhD, or is there some value in getting an MPH first?

2) What are the pros and cons of a PhD vs. a DrPH? I realize that the former is more research-focused and the other is more "practice" oriented, but what does this translate into as far as jobs go? Is choosing one or the other going to significantly alter my job prospects, or is there some blurring of the lines, so to speak? Are there any types of jobs you simply can't get with a PhD that you can get with a DrPH, and vice versa?

3) Is the DrPH degree respected / valued in the public health community? In my own field (nursing) there is a practice doctorate as well (DNP), but it is controversial and some people do not respect that degree (with some good reasons). I have heard of PA doctorate degrees that do not significantly improve clinical skills and mostly just focus on "fluff." Is the DrPH seen as a light-weight degree that is the result of "degree inflation", or is it truly challenging and respected?

4) If anyone here applied for / is applying to a DrPH or PhD, can you explain the reasons you chose one over the other?

Thanks for anyone that can answer any of these questions.

Check out this thread I wrote over on SDN: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=644314

1.) MPH or MS. Almost all PhD students do hold a prior masters. They're just the most competitive applicants.

2.) There are no "true" road blocks, but you rarely see DrPH holders that are researchers in the typical sense (academic, government, industry). Not sure if it's just the way it works out or not, though.

3.) I've never heard that it's a bad degree, but then again, few schools offer it, which might explain the small volume.

4.) I never even considered a DrPH because I have little interest in practice--I wanted quantitative and molecular research training, and that's what my PhD is giving me. DrPH research is much more integrated/health systems oriented, and it wouldn't provide the same type of research output as a PhD program would (for me).

[Nurse Wretched]

Check out this thread I wrote over on SDN: http://forums.studen...ad.php?t=644314

1.) MPH or MS. Almost all PhD students do hold a prior masters. They're just the most competitive applicants.

2.) There are no "true" road blocks, but you rarely see DrPH holders that are researchers in the typical sense (academic, government, industry). Not sure if it's just the way it works out or not, though.

3.) I've never heard that it's a bad degree, but then again, few schools offer it, which might explain the small volume.

4.) I never even considered a DrPH because I have little interest in practice--I wanted quantitative and molecular research training, and that's what my PhD is giving me. DrPH research is much more integrated/health systems oriented, and it wouldn't provide the same type of research output as a PhD program would (for me).

It's not true that almost all PhD students hold a prior master's. At many research universities' nursing programs, there is pressure to enter the doctoral program direct from undergrad, since master's degrees in the OP's field (nursing) are clinical degrees.

OP, I think the most important question is what do you want to do? About a third of my nursing faculty at Major Northwest Research University held DrPH degrees, in part because the PhD in nursing was uncommon in the past. Do you want to study public health, or is your primary interest in nursing research? The joint MPH/PhD program isn't uncommon; the University of Washington has that as an option, for an example.

[Stories]

It's not true that almost all PhD students hold a prior master's. At many research universities' nursing programs, there is pressure to enter the doctoral program direct from undergrad, since master's degrees in the OP's field (nursing) are clinical degrees.

In public health disciplines, almost all PhD students do have a prior master degree. In most other disciplines, though, you're right (ie. nursing).

[PrevMed]

I think MPHs are a waist of time for multiple reasons. The first being many major universities' mph programs are diploma mills for MDs or residents so the quality of education is poor, especially at the big names in pub. health e.g., johns hopkins, harvard, berkley etc.

If you cannot get into a PhD program today, I would suggest getting a master's degree in a math/statistics/science type discipline. Do NOT get a master's in something like nursing or kinesiology or nutrition. These majors are for people who cannot do science and they generally end up in very remedial schools, if they choose to transfer over to pub health later in life.

I know a few Dr. PHs and they are very smart but have very limited skill sets. They have not brought in any dollars from research grants at least not from NIH which is very important to do especially if you want promotions and tenure. Dr. PHs are more analysts than anything else. They do a lot of consulting and generally teach data analysis courses to MPH students, if they have to teach at all.

Pub Health is one of the best disciplines in academia, if you are good at what you do. You have opportunities to help people at a mass level and the opportunity to earn a very comfortable salary.

[eat.climb.love]

Hey all, I'm seeking some advice about entering public health. I am considering applying for some sort of public health program in the next few years but I am not sure what is right for me. I have a couple of questions:

1) Do many people start with an MPH and then go on to get a PhD? Would this be a waste of time and would I be better off just going straight for a PhD, or is there some value in getting an MPH first?

2) What are the pros and cons of a PhD vs. a DrPH? I realize that the former is more research-focused and the other is more "practice" oriented, but what does this translate into as far as jobs go? Is choosing one or the other going to significantly alter my job prospects, or is there some blurring of the lines, so to speak? Are there any types of jobs you simply can't get with a PhD that you can get with a DrPH, and vice versa?

3) Is the DrPH degree respected / valued in the public health community? In my own field (nursing) there is a practice doctorate as well (DNP), but it is controversial and some people do not respect that degree (with some good reasons). I have heard of PA doctorate degrees that do not significantly improve clinical skills and mostly just focus on "fluff." Is the DrPH seen as a light-weight degree that is the result of "degree inflation", or is it truly challenging and respected?

4) If anyone here applied for / is applying to a DrPH or PhD, can you explain the reasons you chose one over the other?

Thanks for anyone that can answer any of these questions.

1) If you are really sure about the subfield of public health that you want to go into there is always the MA/MS option and then apply to PhD options. However, if you already have the master's in nursing, it could be possible to apply to doctorate programs. I have professors who started out with the MPH and then went to PhD and some who did the MA/MS option before continuing.

I think MPHs are a waist of time for multiple reasons. The first being many major universities' mph programs are diploma mills for MDs or residents so the quality of education is poor, especially at the big names in pub. health e.g., johns hopkins, harvard, berkley etc.

If you cannot get into a PhD program today, I would suggest getting a master's degree in a math/statistics/science type discipline. Do NOT get a master's in something like nursing or kinesiology or nutrition. These majors are for people who cannot do science and they generally end up in very remedial schools, if they choose to transfer over to pub health later in life.

I know a few Dr. PHs and they are very smart but have very limited skill sets. They have not brought in any dollars from research grants at least not from NIH which is very important to do especially if you want promotions and tenure. Dr. PHs are more analysts than anything else. They do a lot of consulting and generally teach data analysis courses to MPH students, if they have to teach at all.

Pub Health is one of the best disciplines in academia, if you are good at what you do. You have opportunities to help people at a mass level and the opportunity to earn a very comfortable salary.

Ouch ... I hope there aren't any nursing/nutrition/kin majors reading this. Might not be the nicest comment to say to someone who has Nursing as their program. .

I do remember the nutrition major being extremely science heavy at my undergrad institution so I don't know about this being a field for people who don't "do" science.

Edited February 2, 2011 by eat.climb.love

[Stories]

I think MPHs are a waist of time for multiple reasons. The first being many major universities' mph programs are diploma mills for MDs or residents so the quality of education is poor, especially at the big names in pub. health e.g., johns hopkins, harvard, berkley etc.

If you cannot get into a PhD program today, I would suggest getting a master's degree in a math/statistics/science type discipline. Do NOT get a master's in something like nursing or kinesiology or nutrition. These majors are for people who cannot do science and they generally end up in very remedial schools, if they choose to transfer over to pub health later in life.

I know a few Dr. PHs and they are very smart but have very limited skill sets. They have not brought in any dollars from research grants at least not from NIH which is very important to do especially if you want promotions and tenure. Dr. PHs are more analysts than anything else. They do a lot of consulting and generally teach data analysis courses to MPH students, if they have to teach at all.

Pub Health is one of the best disciplines in academia, if you are good at what you do. You have opportunities to help people at a mass level and the opportunity to earn a very comfortable salary.

So much hate in this post... why bother posting here if you're just negative and don't truly understand much about what us getting doctorates in a public health discipline are about? I was a biology major in undergrad and I work with genetic markers in my research (SNPs, Haplotypes, and adducts). Is that not doing science? Am I at a remedial program? Yeesh.

[Chrish0204]

Thanks for all the informative responses. Any degree in a public health field would be a few years in the future for me, but these responses actually helped clear some things up for me. Mostly I am interested in epidemiology (infectious disease, hospital infection control, social determinants of the spread of disease, etc.) and I could see myself being happy working for the EIS or something similar. Seems like nurses need an MPH or greater to work with them.

Does anyone know the relative merit of getting a highly regarded degree (either MPH or PhD)? Do organizations like the CDC, WHO, etc. care a great deal that you went to the very top public health schools?

[jordanami]

DrPH actually may be more competitive for admissions without a master's. I am applying to DrPH programs halfway through an MPH program and am finding that there are a lot more PhD programs that I could apply to than DrPH. For DrPH they tend to place more value on work experience than PhD, and in most cases they like to see post-master's work experience in a management role. For me, I want to teach and I want to develop/run public health intervention programs, so DrPH is the right choice.

You can look at the federal jobs website to see what jobs are out there. I also check idealist.org for pub health jobs. There are jobs out there, but it might be smart to consider the jobs that are available before you choose your specialty. For example, it looks to me like there are a lot of jobs for people working with HIV/AIDS right now. I'm planning to move into health education/maternal child, so I may try to get some HIV/AIDS experience during my practicum to make myself more marketable for those HIV prevention jobs.

Thanks for all the informative responses. Any degree in a public health field would be a few years in the future for me, but these responses actually helped clear some things up for me. Mostly I am interested in epidemiology (infectious disease, hospital infection control, social determinants of the spread of disease, etc.) and I could see myself being happy working for the EIS or something similar. Seems like nurses need an MPH or greater to work with them.

Does anyone know the relative merit of getting a highly regarded degree (either MPH or PhD)? Do organizations like the CDC, WHO, etc. care a great deal that you went to the very top public health schools?

[JenHuff]

Thanks for all the informative responses. Any degree in a public health field would be a few years in the future for me, but these responses actually helped clear some things up for me. Mostly I am interested in epidemiology (infectious disease, hospital infection control, social determinants of the spread of disease, etc.) and I could see myself being happy working for the EIS or something similar. Seems like nurses need an MPH or greater to work with them.

Does anyone know the relative merit of getting a highly regarded degree (either MPH or PhD)? Do organizations like the CDC, WHO, etc. care a great deal that you went to the very top public health schools?

Check out the UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health-- http://www.sph.unc.edu/prospective_students/intro/ --I am an RN, 18 years in family practice, completing my second semester in an MPH in Public Health Leadership/Global Health Certification. Same interests as you; I now have more contacts and paths to choose from than I ever imagined. The nice thing about UNC is that it offers incredible flexibility in terms of residential vs. distance programs, and is ranked as the #1 public (vs. private) public health school. Good luck! (And I am trying to figure out DrPH vs. PhD vs. PA as well--don't know yet. I imagine DrPH)

[juilletmercredi]

1. It is indeed true that most doctoral students in public health have MPH degrees (or some kind of master's). In fact, a lot of PhD and DrPH programs in public health require MPHs or another master's before admitting you. However, some don't. I went straight from undergrad into my program, but I am the only person in my cohort who did that. There's also only one person in the cohort behind me that did the same.

I think there's value in getting an MPH first, but in my experience, as a doctoral student you'll be required to take most of the courses an MPH student would take anyway. As a doctoral student with no MPH, I've had to take biostats, epidemiology, medical sociology, history of public health, etc. I had to take 30 credits in PH. I did avoid taking environmental health sciences and health policy in management, but you have the option to take those classes if you want. (I do regret not taking the HPM course.) It also hasn't increased my time-to-degree much over the MA holders. MPH holders generally can waive two semesters, but they still have to take 30 credits of coursework. That means coursework + comps should take you 2.5 years and then you have however long to finish your dissertation. I had to take 60 credits of coursework because I didn't have a master's, but that only adds a year onto my degree progression. So I essentially saved myself a year (and about $100K).

Since you already have an MSN I think you should apply straight to PhD or DrPH programs, if you know you want a PhD. Only two people in my cohort actually had an MPH; 2 others (besides me) had a master's in something else and 1 didn't have a master's at all but a lot of work experience.

2. Depends on the school. My best friend in my cohort is a DrPH student, but she is definitely not more practice-oriented. (In fact, she's more research-oriented than I am!) And the DrPH program here (Columbia) is not more practice-oriented at all. In fact, you usually have to ask people "Are you PhD or DrPH?" This isn't true everywhere - Emory, for example, clearly states that their DrPH is a practice-oriented program.

I don't think there are any jobs you can get with a DrPH that you can't get with a PhD, but because the DrPH is newer and people perceive it as a PhD, the same may not be true the other way. I know my program has no problem hiring DrPH graduates as professors here (although all of our DrPH professors have come from our own program IIRC). I think a PhD is safer for right now, but as my generation moves into the upper echelons that will probably change.

3. Depends on who you ask, which is going to be a function of where they are in the field. Being younger - both chronologically and in the field - I would say that a DrPH is just as valuable as a PhD. That has to do with my experiences - many of my professors have DrPH and their research seems to be just as cutting-edge as my professors with PhDs. They bring in grants and you generally wouldn't know what degree they had unless you looked at their CV. Other programs that have more practice-oriented DrPH programs, or none at all, may not respect DrPHs who try to come into academia. On the flip side, DrPHs that come from programs that are more practice-oriented may not have strong research skills.

In the industry, I'm not sure they make that distinction as much. I also think that an MPH + experience is preferable to a DrPH if you have to pay for the DrPH out of pocket. Most of the jobs I've perused in departments of health or the government or industry require a doctoral degree OR a master's + 2-3 years of experience.

4. I had to do a PhD because I had no master's. I have yet to find a DrPH program that didn't require an MPH.

I think MPHs are a waist of time for multiple reasons. The first being many major universities' mph programs are diploma mills for MDs or residents so the quality of education is poor, especially at the big names in pub. health e.g., johns hopkins, harvard, berkley etc.

False. Most of the MPH students here at Columbia DO NOT have MDs and are not residents. We do have a few medical students and MD holders who are getting their MPHs, but they are by no means the majority. That's also true at HSPH, and although I can't speak to JHU and Berkeley, I also don't think MDs are the majority there either. I also would not say that the quality of education is poor here at all, and I have friends who got their MHS at JHU and they say that it's not poor there either.

I do agree that I believe a master's degree in a statistics or science program would be more beneficial than an MPH, though. Unless you get an MPH in biostats or epi. But nursing IS a science field and an MSN would definitely help you get into a PhD program in public health (not to mention that you *could* work part-time as a nurse to supplement your stipend in grad school...heh) But a master's level nurse with an MPH in biostatistics or epi is like a double-threat.

[Thechanger]

What amazing discussion! It's like thesis debate arguement. Virtually i love MPH and Dr.PH because it were the most influencing program to system of health in the world. If i were you i would to taken sequently both MPH and Dr.PH.. Because i want it.. Could i get these tittle.

[DrJazzy2815]

I think MPHs are a waist of time for multiple reasons. The first being many major universities' mph programs are diploma mills for MDs or residents so the quality of education is poor, especially at the big names in pub. health e.g., johns hopkins, harvard, berkley etc.

If you cannot get into a PhD program today, I would suggest getting a master's degree in a math/statistics/science type discipline. Do NOT get a master's in something like nursing or kinesiology or nutrition. These majors are for people who cannot do science and they generally end up in very remedial schools, if they choose to transfer over to pub health later in life.

I know a few Dr. PHs and they are very smart but have very limited skill sets. They have not brought in any dollars from research grants at least not from NIH which is very important to do especially if you want promotions and tenure. Dr. PHs are more analysts than anything else. They do a lot of consulting and generally teach data analysis courses to MPH students, if they have to teach at all.

Pub Health is one of the best disciplines in academia, if you are good at what you do. You have opportunities to help people at a mass level and the opportunity to earn a very comfortable salary.

This was not a very nice thing to say. I have a Bachelors of Science in Biology (GPA: 3.9); Masters of Business Administration (GPA: 4.0); Master of Exercise Science (similar to i.e. Kinesiology)(GPA: 3.87); Doctor of Public Health degree candidate (GPA: 3.84). I stated my GPA at the end of each program to emphasize the fact that Kinesiology and other allied health professionals are not ignorant or less competent. Many chose those fields of study because that is what they enjoy doing. I personally chose that degree because it was free for me and I am a proponent of healthy living and exercise. Also, many of the community interventions I do involve physical activity, nutrition & obesity and chronic disease prevention. I have taken almost every science class there is to take on both the undergrad and graduate levels. And I made straight A's in almost all of my sciences. My alma matters are all well renowned schools and scored in the top 25 schools according the the U.S. News. Please do not make insulting insinuations about people like that. It's not right.

In addition to this I also currently work at the CDC in the department of Nutrition, Physical Activity and Obesity. There are plenty of health scientists with both PhD's and DrPH degrees who contribute valuable research to the overall field of knowledge.

Hey all, I'm seeking some advice about entering public health. I am considering applying for some sort of public health program in the next few years but I am not sure what is right for me. I have a couple of questions:

1) Do many people start with an MPH and then go on to get a PhD? Would this be a waste of time and would I be better off just going straight for a PhD, or is there some value in getting an MPH first?

2) What are the pros and cons of a PhD vs. a DrPH? I realize that the former is more research-focused and the other is more "practice" oriented, but what does this translate into as far as jobs go? Is choosing one or the other going to significantly alter my job prospects, or is there some blurring of the lines, so to speak? Are there any types of jobs you simply can't get with a PhD that you can get with a DrPH, and vice versa?

3) Is the DrPH degree respected / valued in the public health community? In my own field (nursing) there is a practice doctorate as well (DNP), but it is controversial and some people do not respect that degree (with some good reasons). I have heard of PA doctorate degrees that do not significantly improve clinical skills and mostly just focus on "fluff." Is the DrPH seen as a light-weight degree that is the result of "degree inflation", or is it truly challenging and respected?

4) If anyone here applied for / is applying to a DrPH or PhD, can you explain the reasons you chose one over the other?

Thanks for anyone that can answer any of these questions.

Hi there,

There are quite a few people I work with who did not have an MPH and obtained either a PhD or DPH (DrPH) degree from a CEPH accredited school. From personal exerience, I do not have an MPH but a MS and MBA (neither in public health). However, many DPH (DrPH) degree programs do require a graduate degree related to administration or health.

As far as which degree is better.....in my experience, both degrees are highly valued and respected. There are PhD and DrPH's at the CDC who do similar research. I will say that each school's curriculum varies so be sure to find out as much about the program as possible before enrolling. It is good to have a strong research base regardless of the degree you choose. Right now, if you searched DrPH jobs on Google you would see all sorts of job listing pop up, from academia to community health. There is definitely a place for all practicing and research oriented professionals.

I hope this helps.

[Mandalpaca]

I am completing my Masters in Nursing and plan to apply to a DrPH program for the reasons others have stated -interested in more practice than research. I, however, DO NOT feel my MSN was a waste of time as my specialty electives were PH (epi, health policy, etc..) My main interest is global health and reproductive health (and in the future teaching) and having a MSN with a DrPH will be the most beneficial for my path.