forum phd business 2022

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Search Grad School Admissions

Search up-to-date admission results to more than 250 graduate schools. With over 840,000 admission results submitted, TheGradCafe helps millions of grad students each year with their admissions journey.

TheGradCafe.com

Welcome to TheGradCafe.com! Search our database of over 500,000 admission results or jump into a discussion in the forum. If you've got a question about grad school, we've got it covered.

Grad School Admission Search

Example searches: math* , computer science , (Yale|"johns hopkins") econ* , or "media studies"

See what's brewing

How New Grads Research Companies to Find Jobs

Computer Science Graduate Admission Trends: Annual Results

The Best Academic Planners for 2024/2025

Experience Paradox: Entry-Level Jobs Demand Years in Field

2024 Most popular PhD Programs

2024 most popular master programs.

About Stanford GSB

The Leadership
Dean’s Updates
School News & History
Commencement
Business, Government & Society
Centers & Institutes
Center for Entrepreneurial Studies
Center for Social Innovation
Stanford Seed

About the Experience

Learning at Stanford GSB
Experiential Learning
Guest Speakers
Entrepreneurship
Social Innovation
Communication
Life at Stanford GSB
Collaborative Environment
Activities & Organizations
Student Services
Housing Options
International Students

Full-Time Degree Programs

Why Stanford MBA
Academic Experience
Financial Aid
Why Stanford MSx
Research Fellows Program
See All Programs

Non-Degree & Certificate Programs

Executive Education
Stanford Executive Program
Programs for Organizations
The Difference
Online Programs
Stanford LEAD
Seed Transformation Program
Aspire Program
Seed Spark Program
Faculty Profiles
Academic Areas
Awards & Honors
Conferences

Faculty Research

Publications
Working Papers
Case Studies

Research Hub

Research Labs & Initiatives
Business Library
Data, Analytics & Research Computing
Behavioral Lab

Research Labs

Cities, Housing & Society Lab
Golub Capital Social Impact Lab

Research Initiatives

Corporate Governance Research Initiative
Corporations and Society Initiative
Policy and Innovation Initiative
Rapid Decarbonization Initiative
Stanford Latino Entrepreneurship Initiative
Value Chain Innovation Initiative
Venture Capital Initiative
Career & Success
Climate & Sustainability
Corporate Governance
Culture & Society
Finance & Investing
Government & Politics
Leadership & Management
Markets and Trade
Operations & Logistics
Opportunity & Access
Technology & AI
Opinion & Analysis
Email Newsletter

Welcome, Alumni

Communities
Digital Communities & Tools
Regional Chapters
Women’s Programs
Identity Chapters
Find Your Reunion
Career Resources
Job Search Resources
Career & Life Transitions
Programs & Services
Career Video Library
Alumni Education
Research Resources
Volunteering
Alumni News
Class Notes
Alumni Voices
Contact Alumni Relations
Upcoming Events

Admission Events & Information Sessions

MBA Program
MSx Program
PhD Program
Alumni Events
All Other Events
Requirements
Requirements: Behavioral
Requirements: Quantitative
Requirements: Macro
Requirements: Micro
Annual Evaluations
Field Examination
Research Activities
Research Papers
Dissertation
Oral Examination
Current Students
Entering Class Profile
Education & CV
GMAT & GRE
International Applicants
Statement of Purpose
Letters of Recommendation
Reapplicants
Application Fee Waiver
Deadline & Decisions
Job Market Candidates
Academic Placements
Stay in Touch
Fields of Study
Student Life

Students walking around outside on campus. Credit: Elena Zukhova

Admission to the PhD Program

Each year, we welcome a select group of exceptional individuals to the PhD program. All students bring a readiness to commit to the most rigorous, rewarding experience of their academic careers.

Fall 2024 applications are now closed . The application deadline was December 1, 2023, at 5:00 p.m. Pacific.

1. Get to Know Us

We offer a range of resources and events that can help you determine if the program is right for you.

Learn more about the Stanford GSB experience .
Learn about our PhD program .
Find out what we look for in a candidate.
Attend a PhD recruiting event .

2. Apply to Our Program

Once you’ve decided to apply, take time to familiarize yourself with the application requirements.

Learn about the application requirements .
Complete your online application.

All applicants are carefully considered for their academic preparation and performance, and their potential to be outstanding researchers. We consider the strength of recommendation letters, standardized test scores, rigor of academic preparation, and alignment of research interests between students and faculty, among other areas.

Applicants may apply to the Stanford GSB PhD Program and another program at Stanford University.

See What’s Required for Your Application

Knight-Hennessy Scholars Program

Knight-Hennessy Scholars admits up to 100 select applicants each year from across Stanford’s seven graduate schools, and delivers engaging experiences that prepare them to be visionary, courageous, and collaborative leaders ready to address complex global challenges. As a scholar, you join a distinguished cohort, participate in up to three years of leadership programming, and receive full funding for up to three years of your PhD studies at Stanford.

KHS applicants must have earned their first undergraduate degree within the last seven years, and must apply to both a Stanford graduate program and to KHS. Stanford PhD students may also apply to KHS during their first year of PhD enrollment.

The KHS application deadline is October 11, 2023. Learn more about KHS admission .

Safety, Security, and Fire Report

Stanford University complies with the Jeanne Clery Act and publishes crime statistics for the most recent three-year period.

Privacy & Non-Discrimination

Priorities for the GSB's Future
See the Current DEI Report
Supporting Data
Research & Insights
Share Your Thoughts
Search Fund Primer
Teaching & Curriculum
Affiliated Faculty
Faculty Advisors
Louis W. Foster Resource Center
Defining Social Innovation
Impact Compass
Global Health Innovation Insights
Faculty Affiliates
Student Awards & Certificates
Changemakers
Dean Jonathan Levin
Dean Garth Saloner
Dean Robert Joss
Dean Michael Spence
Dean Robert Jaedicke
Dean Rene McPherson
Dean Arjay Miller
Dean Ernest Arbuckle
Dean Jacob Hugh Jackson
Dean Willard Hotchkiss
Faculty in Memoriam
Stanford GSB Firsts
Class of 2024 Candidates
Certificate & Award Recipients
Dean’s Remarks
Keynote Address
Teaching Approach
Analysis and Measurement of Impact
The Corporate Entrepreneur: Startup in a Grown-Up Enterprise
Data-Driven Impact
Designing Experiments for Impact
Digital Business Transformation
The Founder’s Right Hand
Marketing for Measurable Change
Product Management
Public Policy Lab: Financial Challenges Facing US Cities
Public Policy Lab: Homelessness in California
Lab Features
Curricular Integration
View From The Top
Formation of New Ventures
Managing Growing Enterprises
Startup Garage
Explore Beyond the Classroom
Stanford Venture Studio
Summer Program
Workshops & Events
The Five Lenses of Entrepreneurship
Leadership Labs
Executive Challenge
Arbuckle Leadership Fellows Program
Selection Process
Training Schedule
Time Commitment
Learning Expectations
Post-Training Opportunities
Who Should Apply
Introductory T-Groups
Leadership for Society Program
Certificate
2024 Awardees
2023 Awardees
2022 Awardees
2021 Awardees
2020 Awardees
2019 Awardees
2018 Awardees
Social Management Immersion Fund
Stanford Impact Founder Fellowships and Prizes
Stanford Impact Leader Prizes
Social Entrepreneurship
Stanford GSB Impact Fund
Economic Development
Energy & Environment
Stanford GSB Residences
Environmental Leadership
Stanford GSB Artwork
A Closer Look
California & the Bay Area
Voices of Stanford GSB
Business & Beneficial Technology
Business & Sustainability
Business & Free Markets
Business, Government, and Society Forum
Get Involved
Second Year
Global Experiences
JD/MBA Joint Degree
MA Education/MBA Joint Degree
MD/MBA Dual Degree
MPP/MBA Joint Degree
MS Computer Science/MBA Joint Degree
MS Electrical Engineering/MBA Joint Degree
MS Environment and Resources (E-IPER)/MBA Joint Degree
Academic Calendar
Clubs & Activities
LGBTQ+ Students
Military Veterans
Minorities & People of Color
Partners & Families
Students with Disabilities
Student Support
Residential Life
Student Voices
MBA Alumni Voices
A Week in the Life
Career Support
Employment Outcomes
Cost of Attendance
Yellow Ribbon Program
BOLD Fellows Fund
Application Process
Loan Forgiveness
Contact the Financial Aid Office
Evaluation Criteria
English Language Proficiency
Personal Information, Activities & Awards
Professional Experience
Optional Short Answer Questions
Application Fee
Reapplication
Deferred Enrollment
Joint & Dual Degrees
Event Schedule
Ambassadors
New & Noteworthy
Ask a Question
See Why Stanford MSx
Is MSx Right for You?
MSx Stories
Leadership Development
How You Will Learn
Admission Events
Personal Information
Reference Letters
GMAT, GRE & EA
English Proficiency Tests
Career Change
Career Advancement
Daycare, Schools & Camps
U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents
Faculty Mentors
Current Fellows
Standard Track
Fellowship & Benefits
Group Enrollment
Program Formats
Developing a Program
Diversity & Inclusion
Strategic Transformation
Program Experience
Contact Client Services
Campus Experience
Live Online Experience
Silicon Valley & Bay Area
Digital Credentials
Faculty Spotlights
Participant Spotlights
Eligibility
International Participants
Stanford Ignite
Frequently Asked Questions
Operations, Information & Technology
Organizational Behavior
Political Economy
Classical Liberalism
The Eddie Lunch
Accounting Summer Camp
Videos, Code & Data
California Econometrics Conference
California Quantitative Marketing PhD Conference
California School Conference
China India Insights Conference
Homo economicus, Evolving
Political Economics (2023–24)
Scaling Geologic Storage of CO2 (2023–24)
A Resilient Pacific: Building Connections, Envisioning Solutions
Adaptation and Innovation
Changing Climate
Civil Society
Climate Impact Summit
Climate Science
Corporate Carbon Disclosures
Earth’s Seafloor
Environmental Justice
Operations and Information Technology
Organizations
Sustainability Reporting and Control
Taking the Pulse of the Planet
Urban Infrastructure
Watershed Restoration
Junior Faculty Workshop on Financial Regulation and Banking
Ken Singleton Celebration
Marketing Camp
Quantitative Marketing PhD Alumni Conference
Presentations
Theory and Inference in Accounting Research
Stanford Closer Look Series
Quick Guides
Core Concepts
Journal Articles
Glossary of Terms
Faculty & Staff
Researchers & Students
Research Approach
Charitable Giving
Financial Health
Government Services
Workers & Careers
Short Course
Adaptive & Iterative Experimentation
Incentive Design
Social Sciences & Behavioral Nudges
Bandit Experiment Application
Conferences & Events
Reading Materials
Energy Entrepreneurship
Faculty & Affiliates
SOLE Report
Responsible Supply Chains
Current Study Usage
Pre-Registration Information
Participate in a Study
Founding Donors
Location Information
Participant Profile
Network Membership
Program Impact
Collaborators
Entrepreneur Profiles
Company Spotlights
Seed Transformation Network
Responsibilities
Current Coaches
How to Apply
Meet the Consultants
Meet the Interns
Intern Profiles
Collaborate
Research Library
News & Insights
Program Contacts
Databases & Datasets
Research Guides
Consultations
Research Workshops
Career Research
Research Data Services
Course Reserves
Course Research Guides
Material Loan Periods
Fines & Other Charges
Document Delivery
Interlibrary Loan
Equipment Checkout
Print & Scan
MBA & MSx Students
PhD Students
Other Stanford Students
Faculty Assistants
Research Assistants
Stanford GSB Alumni
Telling Our Story
Staff Directory
Site Registration
Alumni Directory
Alumni Email
Privacy Settings & My Profile
Success Stories
The Story of Circles
Support Women’s Circles
Stanford Women on Boards Initiative
Alumnae Spotlights
Insights & Research
Industry & Professional
Entrepreneurial Commitment Group
Recent Alumni
Half-Century Club
Fall Reunions
Spring Reunions
MBA 25th Reunion
Half-Century Club Reunion
Faculty Lectures
Ernest C. Arbuckle Award
Alison Elliott Exceptional Achievement Award
ENCORE Award
Excellence in Leadership Award
John W. Gardner Volunteer Leadership Award
Robert K. Jaedicke Faculty Award
Jack McDonald Military Service Appreciation Award
Jerry I. Porras Latino Leadership Award
Tapestry Award
Student & Alumni Events
Executive Recruiters
Interviewing
Land the Perfect Job with LinkedIn
Negotiating
Elevator Pitch
Email Best Practices
Resumes & Cover Letters
Self-Assessment
Whitney Birdwell Ball
Margaret Brooks
Bryn Panee Burkhart
Margaret Chan
Ricki Frankel
Peter Gandolfo
Cindy W. Greig
Natalie Guillen
Carly Janson
Sloan Klein
Sherri Appel Lassila
Stuart Meyer
Tanisha Parrish
Virginia Roberson
Philippe Taieb
Michael Takagawa
Terra Winston
Johanna Wise
Debbie Wolter
Rebecca Zucker
Complimentary Coaching
Changing Careers
Work-Life Integration
Career Breaks
Flexible Work
Encore Careers
Join a Board
D&B Hoovers
Data Axle (ReferenceUSA)
EBSCO Business Source
Global Newsstream
Market Share Reporter
ProQuest One Business
Student Clubs
Entrepreneurial Students
Stanford GSB Trust
Alumni Community
How to Volunteer
Springboard Sessions
Consulting Projects
2020 – 2029
2010 – 2019
2000 – 2009
1990 – 1999
1980 – 1989
1970 – 1979
1960 – 1969
1950 – 1959
1940 – 1949
Service Areas
ACT History
ACT Awards Celebration
ACT Governance Structure
Building Leadership for ACT
Individual Leadership Positions
Leadership Role Overview
Purpose of the ACT Management Board
Contact ACT
Business & Nonprofit Communities
Reunion Volunteers
Ways to Give
Fiscal Year Report
Business School Fund Leadership Council
Planned Giving Options
Planned Giving Benefits
Planned Gifts and Reunions
Legacy Partners
Giving News & Stories
Giving Deadlines
Development Staff
Submit Class Notes
Class Secretaries
Board of Directors
Health Care
Sustainability
Class Takeaways
All Else Equal: Making Better Decisions
If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society
Grit & Growth
Think Fast, Talk Smart
Spring 2022
Spring 2021
Autumn 2020
Summer 2020
Winter 2020
In the Media
For Journalists
DCI Fellows
Other Auditors
Academic Calendar & Deadlines
Course Materials
Entrepreneurial Resources
Campus Drive Grove
Campus Drive Lawn
CEMEX Auditorium
King Community Court
Seawell Family Boardroom
Stanford GSB Bowl
Stanford Investors Common
Town Square
Vidalakis Courtyard
Vidalakis Dining Hall
Catering Services
Policies & Guidelines
Reservations
Contact Faculty Recruiting
Lecturer Positions
Postdoctoral Positions
Accommodations
CMC-Managed Interviews
Recruiter-Managed Interviews
Virtual Interviews
Campus & Virtual
Search for Candidates
Think Globally
Recruiting Calendar
Recruiting Policies
Full-Time Employment
Summer Employment
Entrepreneurial Summer Program
Global Management Immersion Experience
Social-Purpose Summer Internships
Process Overview
Project Types
Client Eligibility Criteria
Client Screening
ACT Leadership
Social Innovation & Nonprofit Management Resources
Develop Your Organization’s Talent
Centers & Initiatives
Student Fellowships

EDHEC PhD IN FINANCE FORUM 2022'S DETAILED AGENDA IS NOW AVAILABLE

The fifth EDHEC PhD IN FINANCE FORUM will be held online on 7 June 2022. Discover the detailed agenda and join us ! Five of our PhD candidates and graduates will present their research to an…

The fifth EDHEC PhD IN FINANCE FORUM will be held online on 7 June 2022 . Discover the detailed agenda and join us !

Five of our PhD candidates and graduates will present their research to an international audience of academics and finance practitioners.

We are extremely grateful to Professor Sydney Ludvigson, the Silver Professor of Economics at New York University and Co-Director of the NBER Programme on Asset Pricing, for agreeing to be the Keynote Speaker for this Forum.

More details on this event and registration form can be found on this page .

PhD in Business program - USA

Question banks.

Forum Home

--> --> Prep Toolkit Announcements

Saturday, June 22, 2024
10:30am NY / 2:30pm London / 8pm Mumbai

Also Watch....
Stories that will Inspire You to Reach Your GMAT Goal.
-->
-->
With a particular emphasis on generative AI, the new courses span ground-breaking topics and timely challenges facing business and leaders today.

-->
--> --> Latest Posts

The post is bookmarked successfully

SenSys 2022 PhD Forum

HotCRP.com signin

New to the site? Create an account

Submissions

The deadline for registering submissions has passed.

Communities Pre-Med Medical Resident Audiology Dental Optometry Pharmacy Physical Therapy Podiatry Psychology Rehab Sci Veterinary
What's new Trending New posts Latest activity
Support Account Help Confidential Advising
Vision, Values and Policies
Research Communities
Physician Scientists

* 2021-2022 MD/PhD cycle - Questions, Comments, and other things *

Thread starter Fencer
Start date May 23, 2021

MSTP Director

May 23, 2021

MSTPadvocate

Full member.

May 24, 2021

Fencer said: Here is the new cycle thread... I will be posting updates for the new cycle, after I submit my NIH grant on Tuesday late. Click to expand...

May 25, 2021

From their point-of-view (applicant), they are submitting starting on May 28. We (PDs) are seeing them beginning June 26.... We start orientation for the 2021 group in June, but the newest recruit group is almost here.

May 26, 2021

Success.... grant submitted! It seems that we for the 2021 cycle most (if not all) MD/PhD programs will be doing VIRTUAL interviews. On the other hand, most programs want a real face-to-face in person 2nd visit. I will be doing Zoom one-to-one meetings for 2021-22 applicants. If you want to sign up, please PM me.

I remember when summer used to be summer. AMCAS came to us in a weekly file download beginning in August. Secondary applications were mailed out to applicants, who mailed them back in. Interviews started in November and ended in February. Even though the deadline for decisions was May 15, 90% of our class was filled by April 1. Summer was 3 glorious months when we did not really need to think much about admissions; time enough to prepare our T32 application, or even take a non-work-related vacation. Still, things are better now in many ways. SDN, for instance.

chemicallycozy

May 27, 2021

If anyone would be down to answer this question - so I applied to MSTP and MD/PhD programs last cycle. I got interviews but eventually was WL'ed from the programs. For this cycle I'm switching gears and applying a majority MD and a few MD/PhD given last cycle's results and my stats being below average for the dual degree. How would adcoms see this change as I'm now a reapplicant? Would it be a red flag, especially to the schools that I did get II's at? Also if this is in the wrong thread please let me know - decided to post here for obvious reasons.

chemicallycozy said: If anyone would be down to answer this question - so I applied to MSTP and MD/PhD programs last cycle. I got interviews but eventually was WL'ed from the programs. For this cycle I'm switching gears and applying a majority MD and a few MD/PhD given last cycle's results and my stats being below average for the dual degree. How would adcoms see this change as I'm now a reapplicant? Would it be a red flag, especially to the schools that I did get II's at? Also if this is in the wrong thread please let me know - decided to post here for obvious reasons. Click to expand...

Maebea said: The AMCAS information does not flag you as having applied previously. (It will, however, tell us whether you have previously enrolled in a medical school.) At the institutional level, they would be able to tell from their internal records (if they bother to look) that you had applied there previously. What they do with this information is anyone's guess. I do not believe that an MD admission committee view as a negative the fact that you had previously applied MD-PhD to that same institution. Individuals change their career objectives all the time. (Every year, 10-15% of individuals who are accepted to MD-PhD programs decline the offer; nearly all will enroll in MD-only programs.) IMO, if you previously interviewed at a school but were not accepted, the chance of being interviewed, much less accepted, a second time around is slight. By the time we offer an interview to someone, we are fairly convinced that they are competitive for a spot in our program. Our statistics tell us that 98% of the applicants we interview will get into an MD-PhD program. I would avoid re-applying MD-PhD to the programs that interviewed you last cycle, and would focus on schools that did not interview you last time. This year, we interviewed 4 re-applicants who we had rejected without interview in previous cycles. All had substantially improved their applications through additional research exposure in the intervening time, and 2 were offered admission here. Click to expand...

Jun 5, 2021

Is it okay to submit your primary to just an MD program and then add MD/PhD programs later and submit the essays after verification?

Yes... You can also stagger submissions so that you don't get crushed with all secondaries at once

MD-PhD-NonTrad

M2 MD/PhD, In Clerkships

Fencer said: Yes... You can also stagger submissions so that you don't get crushed with all secondaries at once Click to expand...

Jun 6, 2021

Here are my recommendation: Now - Submit AMCAS application to at least 1 school (and no more than 10), request all transcripts, and request all LORs 2 weeks after your application has verified, add another 10 schools... 4 weeks after your application has verified, add another 10 schools (if needed)... This way, you effectively stagger your secondary applications with no significant impact on your likelihood of success. Verification takes 4-6 weeks. It can't happen if your transcripts are not available. LORs must be available for your application review. Once verified, adding another school appears in the Inbox of the school within 24 hours. If you are waiting for a MCAT score, you can apply to a single school. Then depending upon the score, you can construct a list upwards or downwards in ranking as you assess. Waiting to submit is typically not a good option as the late verification process might impact your chances with a decent 512 score. PM me if needed.

Jun 9, 2021

neurosci2021 said: If merging activities (e.g. more than 3 into one slot), what info needs to be listed in the activity description? Right now, hours/contact info for each individual activity are taking up most of the space in the activities description, but I would rather use it to reflect etc. Thanks! Click to expand...

applicant20212022

How are papers without PMID's viewed? One of my papers was more engineering-focused (so not on PubMed), but is indexed on another well-regarded (niche) database that AdComs might not be familiar with. Is there a concise way to address this so that AdComs don't automatically assume it was a low-quality publication? Thanks!

Non-PMID manuscripts are seen lower quality than PMID manuscripts (sorry, I can't change that and rather acknowledge it - AdComms are filled with biomedical scientists). Having said that, they are not going to hurt you as MD/PhD AdComs have seen plenty of Engineers, Chemists, and other quality applicants with non-biological research. They show that you have some ability to lead a project....

Peritus_Medicus

Mstp student.

Jun 11, 2021

My MD/PhD application has been verified, and I would like to start pre-writing my secondaries. However, I am having difficulty finding MD/PhD secondary questions (instead of MD-only secondary questions) for most schools. Do most schools not have a different MD/PhD application? Or am I looking in the wrong places? Thank you!

Peritus_Medicus said: My MD/PhD application has been verified, and I would like to start pre-writing my secondaries. However, I am having difficulty finding MD/PhD secondary questions (instead of MD-only secondary questions) for most schools. Do most schools not have a different MD/PhD application? Or am I looking in the wrong places? Thank you! Click to expand...

I like libraries

I'm starting the process of pre-writing secondaries, but I'm unsure about which schools to direct my initial efforts. Applications get released to medical schools on June 25th. Do secondaries all flood in around the same time ~1 week after June 25th or do they arrive in a more staggered fashion? I know California schools screen before secondaries and I was wondering if this results in secondaries arriving over the course of 1 month instead of 1 week.

Jun 12, 2021

With few exceptions, the process of selecting applicants to receive secondary applications is typically the job of a computer. Some schools send them to all applicants, some only to those with MCAT > 510 or x threshold, some pre-review applications before sending them, and a few programs (like mine) do not have a real secondary. We do ask interviewees with several basic questions. Bottomline, most secondary requests come in within 2 weeks of verification, which is the reason that I recommended to stagger adding schools every 2 weeks or so (10 at initial application, 10 about 2 weeks after verification, and 10 more or so after 4 weeks after verification).

Jun 18, 2021

Fencer said: With few exceptions, the process of selecting applicants to receive secondary applications is typically the job of a computer. Some schools send them to all applicants, some only to those with MCAT > 510 or x threshold, some pre-review applications before sending them, and a few programs (like mine) do not have a real secondary. We do ask interviewees with several basic questions. Bottomline, most secondary requests come in within 2 weeks of verification, which is the reason that I recommended to stagger adding schools every 2 weeks or so (10 at initial application, 10 about 2 weeks after verification, and 10 more or so after 4 weeks after verification). Click to expand...

creode said: Do schools somehow look down on applicants that take longer to finish their secondaries after receiving them? Click to expand...

Jun 22, 2021

neurosci2021 said: What complete dates (as in secondary completion) are still considered early/won't hurt chances for MSTP? Click to expand...

We usually send out half our interview offers in mid-to-late August.

@MSTPadvocate : When does one need to be complete by to be in that first pool of invites?

One MSTP Admission Cycle: My MSTP doesn't have a traditional secondary (no extra fees or essays). We begin our formal AMCAS application review until mid-July. We typically send invitations for interview once a month between late July and mid-January. We ask to confirm an interview date and request brief answers to few questions to tailor the virtual interview. We typically give applicants two choices for interview dates. We interview virtually every month between Aug. and Feb with two interview dates in December and January. We accept significant updates throughout the entire cycle, and request an update for all interviewees for our mid-February admission meeting. We give acceptances somewhat in rolling fashion to groups of accepted applicants at least 3 times (late Oct., late December, and mid-February; then, once our accepted class shrinks to our target class size, we start replacing after applicant withdrawals. We send the larger batch of rejections in January, once we fill all of the interview slots. We keep a small group in waitlist to interview. After our mid-Feb meeting, we send our rejections after interview as well as those few waitlisted who didn't make into interviewing. We plan an in-person 2nd visit in April. We request commit to enroll 21 days prior to our MD/PhD orientation and the beginning of our first laboratory rotation.

@Fencer : Thanks for the detailed response. Would you say being complete late July to early August is a detriment, or is it still a good time to be fully complete?

MSTPadvocate said: We usually send out half our interview offers in mid-to-late August. Click to expand...

There are places in FL, in particular, who schedule their interviews after Hurricane season (i.e.: until January). However, most programs have November/December as their peak season. There is a Google Calendar with interview dates... just rewind to 2020 dates to see. Acceptances begin rolling in after October 15, and slowly thru January/February with a large group releasing in February/early-March. As you know from traffic rules, by March 14 programs must have at least as many acceptances as they expect to enroll. See the timing of acceptances, interviews, and rejections in prior 2020-21 threads.

deleted1108964

Jun 24, 2021

Tomorrow, at 7 am (EST), the AMCAS system begins transmitting applications to MD/PhD programs and medical schools in general. As I indicated previously, most programs don't start even looking at the applications until mid-July. However, computers could very easily make preliminary judgments and might start sending requests for secondary applications.

With transmission tomorrow I just wanted to say good luck to everyone applying this cycle!! We've all worked hard to get to this point, sending positive vibes and hoping everyone gets the outcome they would like!

neurosci2021 said: @Fencer : Thanks for the detailed response. Would you say being complete late July to early August is a detriment, or is it still a good time to be fully complete? Click to expand...

MDPhDHopeful3985

Jun 26, 2021

This question is geared toward current MD/PhD (MSTP and non-MSTP) ADCOMS and student ADCOMS. Some schools ask on their secondaries if you are applying to their MD, MD/PhD, or both programs. Will applying to a school's MD and MD/PhD program hurt your chances of being admitted to the MD/PhD program? I'm 100% committed to a research-heavy career and want an MD/PhD above all else - but I also need to move forward with my life and career if I am to become a physician-scientist (I'm a reapplicant).

Every school has its own culture and policies. While it doesn't bother me that some applicants apply to both programs, in my case the evaluation process is entirely independent; that is being considered for MD/PhD (AMCAS) will NOT delay MD (TMDSAS) review. However, in many schools that is the case. Their question in the secondary could be information about logistics on how to process the application. Now, for a MSTP PD, an MD/PhD only applicant shows slightly greater commitment to the physician-scientist path as compared to an applicant hedging between MD/PhD and MD applications. Nevertheless, that slight bias could be easily overcome by demonstrated genuine enthusiasm for a research heavy-career. More important for a re-applicant is to select a broad representative group of MD/PhD programs to apply that have different levels of competitiveness (dream/match/safer). PM me if needed...

Fencer said: Every school has its own culture and policies. While it doesn't bother me that some applicants apply to both programs, in my case the evaluation process is entirely independent; that is being considered for MD/PhD (AMCAS) will NOT delay MD (TMDSAS) review. However, in many schools that is the case. Their question in the secondary could be information about logistics on how to process the application. Now, for a MSTP PD, an MD/PhD only applicant shows slightly greater commitment to the physician-scientist path as compared to an applicant hedging between MD/PhD and MD applications. Nevertheless, that slight bias could be easily overcome by demonstrated genuine enthusiasm for a research heavy-career. More important for a re-applicant is to select a broad representative group of MD/PhD programs to apply that have different levels of competitiveness (dream/match/safer). PM me if needed... Click to expand...

Jul 12, 2021

Just a reminder that UW prelim opens up today.

Jul 16, 2021

For those of you interested in the NIH virtual graduate & professional school fair next week, I made a Google calendar with the 40 participating MD/PhD programs. Make sure to register for more info - this is a great event for meeting program directors and current students!

Jul 17, 2021

Are the numbers in AAMC Table B8 the total number of primary applications or the total number of completed applications (including secondaries). im assuming its the former but just wanted to confirm!

It is the total number of primary verified applications for the 2020 completed cycle. The updated tables with the 2021 numbers will be available in mid December 2021. Please note that overall, we had a 15% increase in the number of applications as compared to 2020. We just reviewed the overall total number of acceptances and they were quite similar between both years, however, the 2021 class will be greater as there were more applicants with at least one MD/PhD acceptance.

Fencer said: It is the total number of primary verified applications for the 2020 completed cycle. The updated tables with the 2021 numbers will be available in mid December 2021. Please note that overall, we had a 15% increase in the number of applications as compared to 2020. We just reviewed the overall total number of acceptances and they were quite similar between both years, however, the 2021 class will be greater as there were more applicants with at least one MD/PhD acceptance. Click to expand...

The impact of COVID in the limitation of quantity and quality of clinical and research experiences was greater in the 2021 cycle as compared to the 2020 cycle. Scores have been trending slightly up over the years, as there are better preparation courses and other resources, but it is truly very small. I do not know if it was a temporary blip above the slightly increasing trend of <4% over past 10 years, or was a substantial increase due to the Zoom/digital transformation in advising or some other reasons. We will find out in a few months...

Fencer said: The impact of COVID in the limitation of quantity and quality of clinical and research experiences was greater in the 2021 cycle as compared to the 2020 cycle. Scores have been trending slightly up over the years, as there are better preparation courses and other resources, but it is truly very small. I do not know if it was a temporary blip above the slightly increasing trend of <4% over past 10 years, or was a substantial increase due to the Zoom/digital transformation in advising or some other reasons. We will find out in a few months... Click to expand...

MD/PhD Applicant

Jul 21, 2021

A lot of secondaries have sections that basically repeat the significant research essay, asking me to input info and description for each experience. Are you guys largely copying and pasting these or just writing a new shorter or longer description?

carsonh11 said: A lot of secondaries have sections that basically repeat the significant research essay, asking me to input info and description for each experience. Are you guys largely copying and pasting these or just writing a new shorter or longer description? Click to expand...

Jul 23, 2021

Quick question - I have submitted most of my secondaries over the past 3 weeks, but realized that my college's committee letter will not be sent to AMCAS until next Monday. Will this delay in my LOR packet negatively affect consideration of my application?

Peritus_Medicus said: Quick question - I have submitted most of my secondaries over the past 3 weeks, but realized that my college's committee letter will not be sent to AMCAS until next Monday. Will this delay in my LOR packet negatively affect consideration of my application? Click to expand...

Jul 27, 2021

What percent of applicants are usually complete (secondaries) in July / August / September / etc. for MSTP?

mitochondriaa

How much do MSTP programs value CASPer score? Do they screen out people with a low CASPer quartile?

Jul 28, 2021

In our MSTP, the answer is absolutely not. Our SOM requires it, and we have to present our proposed acceptances to them. That is when, the Ad Committee reviews it, but I have argued what is known (i.e. non-native speakers perform lower, etc.), plus by that time (after interview), we have an extensive evaluation showing outstanding potential as physician scientist. I have not had a single decline in >50 cases that I have presented with known score. Clearly, someone in the bottom 10 percentile would be carefully reviewed...

Similar threads

Jun 2, 2022

Dec 31, 2023

May 23, 2024
binderpaper
Jun 6, 2024

Oct 15, 2021
This site uses cookies to help personalize content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register. By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies and terms of service . Accept Learn more…

Remember me Not recommended on shared computers

Forgot your password?

Profile Results 2022

By Academic Econ Discord April 17, 2022 in PhD in Economics

Reply to this topic
Start new topic

Link to comment

Share on other sites.

Type of Undergrad: HYP (you can probably guess which)

Undergrad GPA: 3.70

GRE: 169 Quant

Math Courses: Calc I-II (AP), Calc III (B), LA (A-), Analysis (A-), PDEs (B+), Probability Theory (P), Stochastic Calc (A), Measure Theory (A) (latter two were non-degree seeking courses as an RA at a much easier university)

Econ Courses: Honors Intermediate Micro/Macro/Metrics (A-), Game Theory (A), Junior Paper/Thesis (A), All Other Electives (A)

Letters of Recommendation: Two from undergrad professors in the Labor section, for my independent projects, two from Federal Reserve economists (one with ~3K cites, the other with much less)

Research Experience: Two independent projects as an undergrad with two different advisors, two years at regional Fed working on structural urban/macro projects

Teaching Experience: I graded for honors intermediate micro and macro as an undergrad

Research Interests: Broadly macro and labor, also open/international macro and spatial economics

SOP: Felt it was pretty good, although I updated my research statement halfway through my applications to be crisper (however, the place I'm ending up at ironically got the weaker version)

Other: On the diversity spectrum, I am a first-generation college student, but that's about it

Acceptances: UW-Madison ($34,000 stipend years 1-2, $25,000 stipend years 3-5, no TA responsibilities in years 1 and 5), Boston University ($25,134 stipend), UT-Austin ($22,000 stipend, although offered more), UVA ($25,000 stipend), Maryland (I forget lmao), Rochester ($22,000 stipend years 1-2, $26,000 years 3-5), OSU ($34,420 year 1, much less thereafter)

Waitlists (all ended in rejection...): Chicago, NYU, Michigan, Minnesota, Duke, Cornell, Brown

Rejections: Princeton, Stanford, Yale, Northwestern, Columbia, UPenn, UCLA, Penn State

Pending: None

Attending: UW-Madison

Comments: Despite a fair final result, I'm a little disappointed in some ways. On one hand, UW-Madison is a decent result in line with both mine and my letter writers' expectations. However, to have been put on 7(!!) waitlists and to have converted 0(!!) of them was very disappointing, dare I say unheard of. To be fair, I did not try to convert Michigan, Brown, or Cornell. They were not good fits for my interests, and they knew this. But I was particularly disappointed with Duke (attended virtual visit day and later did an interview with them that I thought went very well) and Minnesota (attended virtual visit day also) because I felt they matched my research interests perfectly. I can't say I would've chosen differently, because UW-Madison really pursued me aggressively and made me feel like they wanted me/that I would belong there. But certainly made me feel shitty in the end.

I probably would've just executed a bit better early in my undergrad coursework, but other than that I can't say I'd have changed much in particular.

Type of Undergrad: Go8 (Australia)

Undergrad GPA: 4.00 (Hons)

Math Courses: Analysis 1-2, Algebra 1-2, Linear Algebra 1-2, Calc 1-2

Econ Courses: Hons Micro, Macro, Metrics and Thesis

Letters of Recommendation: 3 Profs: thesis supervisor, RA supervisor, other

Research Experience: RA and policy internships (no pre-doc)

Teaching Experience: TA for 2 semesters

Research Interests: Macro theory/monetary

SOP: Generic

Acceptances: Penn State ($$)

Waitlists: Stanford, Northwestern, NYU, UCLA, Minnesota

Rejections: Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Chicago, Columbia, UPenn, Yale, UC Berkeley

Comments:

I am very grateful for my acceptance and my waitlists!! I offer some advice/reflections below (mainly for Aus students).

Waitlists are hard to convert and every school will express optimism about admitting you -- I should've been less hopeful about getting off any given waitlist.

(This is wild speculation, but) being a macro and non-applied student appears to narrow your options among top schools -- it will be interesting to see the results from other macro candidates. Maybe this should have been obvious. Most Australian students are a long shot for T5, but might be considered by UC Berkeley, Yale and the other T10. If you do macro theory, I can't imagine UC Berkeley or Yale being a strong match. That leaves only the lower T10 schools such as NYU, Columbia and UPenn, which would target macro students. On the other hand, I imagine applied micro is targeted by almost every school.

If ex-ante I wanted to maximise the average rank of my offers or the number of offers I got, then I shouldn't have done macro (or macro theory)! If I wanted to do macro (or macro theory) anyway then I should have lowered my expectation of offers to lower ranks within T20.

Maths and Real Analysis doesn't seem to be important anymore -- an Aus hons degree in Econ could be enough.

I was given some helpful advice when choosing between offer: don't focus on initial placements -- they are noisy and being over-placed can be stressful; and look at outcomes 5-10 years out to get a better sense of value-added.

I would have applied to pre-docs much earlier. I would consider revealing a different part of my research interests -- maybe expressing an interest in applied macro. I wouldn't have focused on the name behind my letters so much! I wouldn't have done so much maths.

proletariat

Type of Undergrad: Top 50 LAC

Undergrad GPA: 3.74

Type of Grad: N/A

Grad GPA: N/A

GRE: N/A. I have a strong hostility toward standardized tests and its nonsense since I applied for undergrad, so I decided not to take it at all.

Math Courses: Linear Algebra, Matrix Analysis, Calc Sequence, ODE, Probability, Math Stat, Abstract Algebra, Real Analysis (All A)

Econ Courses: Intermediate Micro & Macro, Econometrics I, Optimization, Advanced Macro, Behavioral, Theory of Firms, some other electives (Mostly A, some A-)

Other Courses: N/A

Letters of Recommendation: All from undergrad profs (2 econ + 1 math). I am sure they are stellar as I am one of the best of my college in the past few years. Also they told me that the letters directly compared me with other graduates of my college who entered most programs that I applied to, so it is a huge plus.

Research Experience: RA for my undergrad profs. No predoc. Write one solo paper that eventually was presented at some economic conferences.

Teaching Experience: N/A

Research Interests: Experimental, Micro, Political Economy

SOP: I think I tried my best in SoP, since I really spent time to tailor different statements to different schools. I think my interest was really clear as I targeted specific faculty members and kept my eyes on their research pretty closely.

Acceptances: UCSB (off the waitlist), IUB, GMU, MSU (MA), BGSE (MA)

Waitlists: UCSB (eventually accepted)

Rejections: Booth, Maryland, Pitt

Pending: None

Attending: UCSB

Comments: Happy with the ending. Here are what I have taken from this cycle (of course, some of them might not be objectively true):

- Don't underrate SoP. I know that this is controversial. But one of my profs told me that he talked to the DGS of two Ag Econ programs, and they rank SoP just below LoR in terms of importance. Of course, this for sure differ from school to school, as a lot of them practically do not care about SoP. But it really does not hurt you to craft your SoP well. A good SoP does not guarantee you an offer, but a bad SoP, especially a generic one plugging faculty members' names to show artificial interest, will definitely throw you out of the pile.

- For people who come from lower-ranked LAC or state schools like me: apply to programs where your professors have a solid network, or programs where alums of your current school have gone to (and succeeded). This allows the prof to directly compare you with names that are familiar with the adcoms. I was unlucky since my profs' network is mostly with Ag Econ, which is not my cup of tea, but at least I was able to get good letters.

- Talk to alums of your schools who ended up doing PhD. They are extremely helpful during the whole application process, especially with preparing for interviews.

- I realized too lately that the lack of GRE really limited my school list. There are some other schools that might be a reasonable gamble with research fit for me, like UC Irvine, but I couldn't apply without the GRE. Also, I should gamble with some more schools that didn't require the GRE like Stanford, UMich, UWash, or Cornell. I decided not to do so because of either loose research fit or low change of getting admission, but now I think I should have done otherwise.

- I also should have tried to push harder for one of my papers for publication, but well the online time really degenerated my productivity.

- Prepare my application materials earlier. I was a little bit rushed near the deadlines, though everything ended up to be fine. But if I finalized most of my materials during the summer I would be in a way better state.

econmasterabc

Type of Undergrad: US-news top 30

Undergrad GPA: 3.92

GRE: 168 Quant

Math Courses: Calc II-III, ODE and PDE, Nonlinear dynamics and chaos (B), Matrices, Linear Algebra, Intro Prob theory (A-), Intro Math Stats (B+), Advanced Prob theory (B+), Math of Finance, Mathematical Interest Theory, Adv Calculus, Complex Variables (B+), Numerical Methods, Stochastic Process, Linear Programming (All A/A+ unless otherwise stated)

Econ Courses: Intro Micro/Macro (A/A), Intermediate Micro/Macro/Metrics, Matching and Market Design, Enviromental Economics, Strategy, Game theory, Migration Econ and Policy, Honors Seminar (A), PhD Micro I (B+), PhD Macro I, PhD Math-Econ, PhD Metrics I, PhD Adv Metrics II (All A+ unless otherwise stated)

Other Courses: a few statistics /finance undergrad courses (10+, all A)

Letters of Recommendation: 2 course letters, 2 research letters

Research Experience: no RA, a few math/stats independent or class research projects, all at elementary level

Teaching Experience: a few semesters graders, 2 semesters of TA

Research Interests: econometrics, with broad interests in applied micro and finance

SOP: standard, tailored each with one paragraph for each school

Other: non-first generation (probably third or fourth) international student ; I decided to apply for econ phd in late junior year (without any econ coursework other than intro micro/macro) and then stayed one more year at my institution for preparation.

Acceptances: Cornell, Penn State, Michigan, Madison, UCSB

Waitlists: UCSD

Rejections: Yale, Northwestern, UCB, NYU, UCLA, Caltech, Duke, Brown, JHU

Pending: UNC (Just don't apply to this school)

Attending: Michigan

Comments: Unless you have super strong (e.g all A+) and hardcore math background such as topology/ measure theory / functional analysis / Grad Math and you prefer to work on theory, it seems that nowadays it's really hard to get into top 10 from a non top 10 undergrad without predoc at big places / Fed / NBER and etc. This site helps me a lot and I checked a few times during the application season, so I think it would be helpful to share my profile with future applicants.

Would apply to more programs in top 10, perhaps at least try Stanford, Chicago, Columbia and Upenn; Would decide to apply for phd earlier, so would have opportunities to work as RA, do more econ-related researches, submit a better writing sample; Would try harder to not bomb my phd micro exam but this was also partially due to my crashed schedules and stress given the previous point; Would take more analysis courses since I indicated heavy theoretical interests in SOP and work harder on math-stats courses in earlier undergrad, some interviewers questioned my proof-based/abstract math capabilities to do Metrics.

kingwilling

Type of Undergrad : US News Top 100 University, unranked in Economics

Undergrad GPA : 4.0

Type of Grad : N/A

Grad GPA : N/A

GRE : 157 Q, 163 V

Math Courses : 4.0 in Cal I-III, Linear Algebra, Intro to Stats, and Intro to Advanced Mathematics (proofs class). Enrolled in Real Analysis with an A at time of applications.

Econ Courses : 4.0 in Intermediate Micro, Intermediate Macro, Econometrics, Advanced Macro, Math Methods for Economists, and International Economics

Letters of Recommendation : 1 letter from a professor I'd known for 2 years. 2 letters from professors that read and sat for my presentation on my Econometrics Senior Thesis. (These two also had PhDs from Northwestern University, which is where I got accepted to.)

Research Experience : 1 year undergraduate RAship

Teaching Experience : None

Research Interests : Game theory, decision theory, I/O, and labor economics

SOP : Put A LOT of effort into my SOP because I have a unique background in CS and video game development that I plan to incorporate into my research.

Acceptances : Northwestern University, University of Notre Dame, and University of Alabama (all fully funded)

Waitlists : UC Santa Barbara, University of Arizona, and Vanderbilt University. (Asked to be removed from all of them in lieu of the Northwestern offer.)

Rejections : UT Austin, University of Washington, U Chicago (Booth), UC Berkeley, Harvard University, and Stanford University

Attending : Northwestern University

Comments : "I can't believe that GRE score." I comment on what happened there below. This cycle, I took advantage of the fact that I did not have to submit GRE scores everywhere, and I only submitted them when necessary. In an ironic twist of events, the only schools I did submit my GRE scores to either accepted me without a waitlist or waitlisted me. I feel for international students that have to jump through perfect GRE scores, graduate degrees, and predocs to get into a T20 program, but I have to wonder if my experience shows that US students have a pretty definite upper hand (and perhaps should tone down the stress to do extra unless you performed poorly in your undergrad program).

Also, Notre Dame and Northwestern commented on my SOP positively in the admissions process, indicating that it might have played a larger role than people usually think it would.

Take the GRE earlier... much, much earlier. I had some really sour circumstances that forced me to take it last minute with near zero studying, and application deadlines were right around the corner so I couldn't retake it. Had I gotten a higher GRE score, I could have applied to a much wider range of schools (maybe I should have anyway seeing my results). Still, I can't complain at all, and Northwestern was my dream school anyway. Call me a happy camper!

Type of Undergrad: Maths and philosophy integrated bachelor's and master's from top 2 UK undergrad.

Undergrad GPA: First class.

Type of Undergrad 2: Economics graduate diploma (undergrad level) from uni that's unknown internationally (studied in evening classes while working).

Undergrad 2 GPA: Distinction.

Type of Grad: Very good UK master's.

Grad GPA: No grades at time of application.

GRE: 170 Q / 164V / 5.5 AW.

Math Courses: Linear algebra, Analysis, Calculus, Probability, Groups and group actions, Linear algebra II, Metric spaces and complex analysis, Topology, Rings and modules, Logic, Set theory, Representation theory, Galois theory, Extended essay in mathematics; marks in the 60s-80s -- good but not stellar, first class overall; mainly studied irrelevant pure maths; all proof-based.

Econ Courses: Intermediate micro, Intermediate macro, Intermediate econometrics; marks in the 80s-90s (from much lower ranking uni than maths courses). Currently taking advanced courses in micro, macro, econometrics, growth and development in historical perspective.

Other Courses: Several philosophy courses; marks in the 60s-80s -- very high mark overall, won an award.

Letters of Recommendation: (1) Maths professor who taught me several courses and supervised summer research project and extended essay; should be strong and detailed, but they're not an economist; (2) Master's micro professor and academic mentor (young AP); discussed my writing sample with them but they only knew me for ~3 months at the time of writing the letter, so can't have been that strong/credible; (3) Master's programme director (full professor); must have been very generic and not detailed as they barely know me.

Research Experience: No RA; I wrote a decision theory paper last year to discuss with letter writers so they could comment on research potential in their letters and to submit as a writing sample. Maths summer research project, which developed into maths extended essay. Econometrics research project for graduate diploma. Master's philosophy thesis in decision theory and ethics.

Teaching Experience: None.

Research Interests: Mainly micro theory, maybe economic growth.

SOP: I got good feedback on it but I don't think it was anything special. One paragraph tailored to each program. Some regrets (see below).

Other: Worked for a couple of years in an unrelated field between undergrad 1 and master's (did undergrad 2 during my first year of work).

Acceptances: Northwestern (waitlist), Bonn, UT Austin.

Waitlists: Northwestern, Brown.

Rejections: MIT, Harvard, Stanford, Princeton, Yale, Chicago, Columbia, Brown (waitlist).

Attending: Northwestern.

Comments: Very happy with this outcome! My master's sends a small number of students straight to top 10 programs without predocs, so I figured it was worth a shot. I didn't have time to do 20+ applications while doing my master's and I expected that my profile might be significantly improved after completing the master's and doing a predoc (as I'd have more detailed letters and master's grades on my transcript). So I applied to a relatively small number of programs, with the intention of doing a predoc and reapplying more broadly if things didn't work out. Given I had no super strong, credible letters from economists and not a lot of relevant research experience, I feel lucky to have these acceptances!

I'm very happy with how things turned out but it's potentially useful to reflect on what I could have done differently.

My letters were probably the weakest part of my application so if there were things I could have done to improve them, they might have made a big difference. I don't think there's a lot I could have done to improve them for this cycle though (e.g. I couldn't take econ courses during my undergrad, so it would have been difficult to build a relationship with an econ prof during my undergrad and a letter from my economics graduate diploma would have carried very little weight outside the UK unfortunately). I think I did a good job with the 3 months I had before application deadlines to get a relatively good letter from my master's, and I expect the strength/credibility of my letters from my master's would always be limited by the short time between starting the master's and applying to PhD programs. If I'd been really organised and proactive, maybe I could have done some RA work before starting my master's to replace letter (3). I think it would have been really difficult to make this happen though, especially during covid.

My maths grades were very good overall but somewhat inconsistent. I worked hard but probably could have done better by using better studying techniques and by managing exam anxiety better.

I didn't really try to get off the waitlist for Brown because I was pretty sure I preferred other options, but I should have made more of an effort so that I had a higher chance of having that option too.

My SoP focused on two completely unrelated ideas/literatures (decision theory and growth theory) because I'm really not sure where I want to specialise yet. To some extent, this is fine -- I don't think having a set research agenda is at all necessary for admission (e.g. several professors I spoke to at visit days encouraged incoming students to keep an open mind regarding research directions). But I think it's easier to create a coherent narrative by focusing on one area, or on related areas, and this might be better for application purposes. Given my background and research experience, I can write much more credibly about decision theory, so maybe I should have focused there. I highly doubt my SoP was decisive for any of my rejections though and I doubt it helped my acceptances (beyond not being disqualifyingly bad). I don't think this matters much for many programs.

Type of Undergrad : Econ/Math BA + Accelerated Masters. Top 100 US Research University. Flagship State Uni.

Undergrad GPA: 3.66

Type of Grad: Top 5 US Masters

Grad GPA: 3.6

GRE: 170 Q / 164 V / 5.5 AW

Math Courses: (A unless stated otherwise; see note below for more detail) Undergrad: Calc I&II (AP), Calc III, Linear Algebra (B+), Discrete Math, Numerical Analysis, Diff Eq (C), Intro to Stats, Math Stats I&II, Probability Theory (B+) Grad: Real Analysis I&II (B), Topology (C+), Complex Analysis I, Numerical Analysis, Graph-Matrix Theory

Econ Courses: (A unless stated otherwise; see note below for more detail) Standard undergrad courses. Graduate Micro/Macro/Metrics and Economic Forecasting. PhD Metrics I-III at 2 different Unis (A/A/B & B+/B+/A), same with PhD Macro I (B & A-), with the second uni being much higher ranked. Also PhD Macro II at first university.

Other Courses: Econ research, data mining, Probability theory of ML, classes in R and Java

Letters of Recommendation: 1. Older research mentor/co-author who speaks very highly of me. 2. Recently tenured Ass Prof pretty well known in field. 3. Older. established in field, doesn't know me personally super well.

Research Experience: Several years. Dissertation-level RAship. At the stage now I'm trying to publish.

Teaching Experience: Lots of TAing (3-4 years)

SOP: Well-written, could have stood to narrow down research into sub-fields.

Other: I retook graduate Real Analysis II (D) and PhD Macro I (B-), but these grades did show up on my transcript. More details below. For LORs I'd recommend a similar breakdown as I had, with the exception that you should ideally have 2 young profs and all of them know you well.

Offers: BC, WUSTL, USC, Vandy, Emory, UCI, Indiana, Notre Dame

Rejections: LSE, Texas, Duke, Maryland, JHU, Rochester

Comments/What would you do differently : Vibes are great at Indiana and USC both from current students and faculty. This is my third time applying to programs so I have a lot to say. I hope this reaches at least one person is in my old shoes

First briefly, when applying Start applications early and apply to as many programs as your letter writers are comfortable writing letters for . I applied to a healthy number of schools but unless financial burden from fees is too big, apply to even more than me (as many as possible). This process is noisy as hell and you never know how your thinking will change in 6 months. We've seen lots of people get "randomly lucky" (i.e. just had good fit but poor credentials) over the years (search UCSD grad cafe and scroll through acceptances for a heartwarming story). The downside of this is more apps take away from your most preferred schools apps, so again start early.

Ok more important stuff.

1. For Classes- Quality over Quantity!!!!

This is the biggest thing I would have done differently. When I settled on this as a career path and looked at EMJR/this forum I got scared by my schools lack of prestige. So I decided I was going to take 7 graduate classes a semester, well more than I needed to graduate *early to simultaneously earn a double-major bachelors and a accelerated masters* all while being in a time intensive extracurricular to pay for my school, and manage to get a 4.0 so I could write my ticket to a big shot program. Obviously in retrospect, a horrible idea that had no chance of succeeding. I had several professors who didn't know my full academic history surprised at my results given my PhD course and and research experience. But ultimately I had too many red flags in math classes to be as successful as I should have been. Bottom line: get As. Don't overload yourself; put yourself in a position to succeed. Just taking the class isn't worth it if you don't do exceedingly well. Bs won't kill you, as other profiles show, but really it doesn't mean much (at least, it doesn't help you at all really but might hurt you) to AdComs that you just took a class if you don't do that well. This is the advice I've gotten after talking to lots of people. When you take too many classes the damn will break at some point. When you have so many finals, things don't go well. My graduating semester I bombed a topology final I hadn't studied enough for, bringing my grade down to a C+, then rushed in late to my PhD Macro final, bringing all that residual stress with me, and bombed that final too, bringing me from the top student (5 person class) to a B. I managed to pull out an A on graduate complex analysis and PhD time series metrics but I could've had an A in Macro too had I just not taken topology.

2. For program selection -- focus on hypotheticals, faculty, and how it feels to interact with schools

Being my third time applying, I was not prepared for the experience of actually getting into schools. I had hoped I'd get into one top choice and this would be easy. But I got into by Middle-Safety schools. And even though I had a ranking of preference, this all went out the window and I was left with a list of programs that were stronger in some areas relative to others, and in the end no clearly dominating offer. Don't just stand idly by waiting for emails. Here is what I wish i had done before I got results: imagine you get into a subset of your non-top choices. How would you feel? For instance just randomly imagine you get into your 5th, 7th, and 10th choice. What are the pros and cons of each? Which school has the faculty you want to work with the most? Which school has the place you'd be happiest waking up every day? Which school has the best culture? For the latter two questions, what's really important is having lots of contact with schools, go to visit days virtual or otherwise. Get a sense of the vibe and the culture. Ask your advisors and alumni (or grad students at your current school if they know anyone). When you talk to students at the prospective school, remember that most all grad students are going to be miserable to some extent, but look at their body language when you ask current students about departmental support and quality of life and see what happens. Ask them about the people you are considering for your advisors; do the "star faculty" actually care/help? Email/talk to the profs you want to be your advisor *after you get accepted*. Size up your potential cohort even if they're on a zoom with you; would you like doing a problem set with them? If you're on the waitlist, tell your current advisors/mentors in case they have any leverage and email the points of contact at these schools and tell them you really wanna go (if that's true). When it comes down to making the final selection for a school, here's the most important factor/thing to remember: prestige is nice but the most important is your advisor relationships. If you aren't super confident about your field, go to the place with the most well-rounded program. If you've got a good idea, really look at the professors who are working in the same domain, whose papers you really like reading. Advisors are a lot better when they like what you're working on. Also try to avoid cut-throat, toxic places unless that kind of thing drives you (e.g. Chicago -- if the idea of your office space being contingent on your first year grades scares you don't go). In the end, it's better to be a star at a lower ranked place than to be below the median at a top 10 (they won't push for you as earnestly on the market). Of course, you don't want that pressure to have to be a star ideally, but you really have to break down what programs will give you want you want research wise. Most of the top 20 won't, in terms of interests aligning pretty perfectly. So when it's time to make a decision when you have your results make a list of the schools where a) you'd be happy from a location/culture perspective b) who has faculty "at the frontier" of your specific paper writing aspirations ahead of what you've gotten into. Once I did this I found there were pretty much 2 schools clearly dominating (didn't include Stanford because grad school is hard enough without having to compete with that cohort) , and they both are very hard to get into, so I'm happy with how things turned out.

3. For admission season, get rid of unnecessary stress!

There are two types of people -- ones that should be on GradCafe and those who shouldn't. Know yourself! For some people looking at results come out is reassuring because there's not an unknown, which is worse. But a lot of people on there are making their anxiety worse. Most of the comments on there are asking questions that aren't going to help them at all. If you haven't received an email, you haven't received an email. Just take a deep breath and if it comes it comes. Asking things like "when did you receive this", "when did you apply", "has anyone been accepted off the waitlist" are highly irrelevant questions in 99% of cases. Eventually (unless the school is a bunch of dicks like UT Austin who keep applicants in the dark) the results will come. Do not punish yourself any more than the inevitability of the mental burden of admission season will. Stay off this forum and grad cafe if you find yourself in worse shape after looking. However, please do post when you turn down offers . That's something very constructive and helpful for people. Also don't make more than one "please reject offers" posts. At some point there is diminishing returns. One final related note: be careful about asking anonymous forums for advice. People on the waitlist at certain schools (if we ignore morality) should be telling you not to go there; people will lie. Just be careful with that. I wish there was a better forum than EMJR to get advice for this stuff. In the end just keep thinking and working through it and eventually you'll come to an answer you are happy with.

4. General advice implicit from my profile

Research research research. That's the name of the game. These places are getting lots of applicants that are good students. That is not the ultimate aim of the PhD. The biggest fear from admin side is you won't be able to make the transition. Become an RA as soon as possible. Keep a list of research ideas. Attend seminars and read papers on your own. Do a thesis. My biggest problem on this end is I was interested in too much. In the process of narrowing down schools, I got a better sense of the "flavor" of what I wanted to do. I wish I had this on my SOP. Don't be like me and try to put yourself in the mindset of getting there beforehand. As far as classes, Real Analysis is not only a good signal but it's great prep. Even though it gave me a black eye in the form of a D, that class is one of my favorites I've ever taken. For PhD classes, don't overload yourself but if possible take what you're interested in filed wise or Micro. The sooner you start taking hella math the better. Again if financial cost is not prohibitive, take the GRE until you get perfect quant. It's worth having another box to check off. Also for letters, you want them to be able to compare you favorably to past students. So try to get one big name but the other two should be people who really like you and can cheerlead for you.

quantitypham

Type of Undergrad: US News Top 30

Undergrad GPA: 3.8

Type of Grad: Economics 1 year master in Europe top 5

Grad GPA: 3.7 equivalent

GRE: 170Q 161V

Math Courses: Calc 1-3, Linear Algebra applied, ODE, Intro to proofs, Real analysis 1, Linear Algebra, Topology, Intro to Stats (A/A+)

Econ Courses: Micro 1 (B lol), lots of other undergraduate level courses (mostly A); 1st year PhD sequence in Micro (A+\A\A-); 1st year sequence in Metrics (B\A-\B); Phd Macro 1 (B)

Other Courses: A programming course in Python

Letters of Recommendation : Both advisors for my bachelor thesis - I would say good letters because they know me pretty well and are well-established in their field, PhD Micro 1 prof who I RA for after the Master's program - "Super good"

Research Experience: A bachelor thesis in labour, a master thesis in inequality, an experimental paper in the master, RA with prof at master program.

Teaching Experience: loads of group tutoring during UG

Research Interests: behavioural/experimental economics, micro theory

SOP: Alright I think emphasized some research interests. Lightly stated some research lines that I would like to do in the future.

Acceptances: Arizona ($$$), Maryland ($$), UCSB ($$)

Waitlists: Brown(declined)

Rejections: Cornell, Duke, BU, Texas A&M,UT Austin

Attending: 1 of the accepted places.

I didn't intend to do a PhD in economics until the end of my third year, so I had to do all of those math courses in a very intense year.
Reach out to my profs earlier and more during the application process.
I didn't apply to a lot of good programs like Caltech, UCSD, CMU, NYU etc. because I completely forgot about the deadlines to apply in these places. Keeping track of these deadlines should've been a priority.
After missing out on deadlines, I freaked out a bit, and I applied to some schools that didn't really fit my interests like BU, UT Austin, and Cornell where I tried too much to conform my SOP.

Type of Undergrad: Top-70 US News, BS, Double Major Math and Econ

Undergrad GPA: 3.86

GRE: 168Q/162V/5.5AW

Math Courses (A unless otherwise noted): Intro Stats (A-), Calc 1-3, Linear Algebra, Intro to Proofs (B+), ODE (A-), PDE (B+), Real Analysis, Complex Analysis, Numerical Analysis, Math Modeling, Seminar Class in Math (A-), Math Logic

Econ Courses (A unless otherwise noted): Intro Micro, Intro Macro, Intermediate Macro (A-), Intermediate Micro (A-), Mathematical Economics, Econometrics, International Trade Theory, Game Theory, Development (A-), Labor Economics, Financial Econ, Thesis

Other Courses: Some random comp sci courses

Letters of Recommendation: One from UG professor, one from well know Fed economist, one from newer Fed economist (all graduated from top econ/finance programs). UG Professor and newer Fed economist very strong, well known Fed economist probably not as strong.

Research Experience: Some undergrad RA work, undergrad thesis, 2 years at Fed Board

Teaching Experience: N/A

Research Interests: Labor, Education, Macro

SOP: Nothing extraordinary, but fine

Acceptances: Boston University ($$$), Wharton (Finance) ($$$$)

Waitlists: Cornell (declined spot on waitlist)

Rejections: Basically every other top ~20 econ and top ~10 finance.

Attending: Boston University

Comments: My research experience was more finance related, so I think that's why I got into Wharton for Finance without better econ results. My actual research interests are in labor/education, so while Wharton was a hard offer to turn down, I couldn't see myself spending 5 years doing finance research. If I could do it again, I probably would have been more clear about my research interests with letter writers, rather than convincing myself I'd be happy in a finance program. Nonetheless, very happy with BU, though the Wharton stipend would have been nice...

Latino_in_Economics

PROFILE International Student from Latin America

Type of Undergrad: US News Top 15. Lower for Econ (around 30)

Undergrad GPA: 3.95

GRE: 167Q/169V/5.5AW - The GRE is noisy. I took five practice tests and got 169-170Q in all of them, and never above 163V.

Math Courses: Calc I,II,III (As); Linear Algebra (A-); Intro to Math Reasoning (A); Real Analysis (A); Intro to Op. Research (A); Probability (A); Math Stats (A); Numerical Analysis (A); Intro to Math Research (A); Topology (A); Problem Solving in Math (A); Intro to Stoch. Processes (A); Math Meth. in Fin. Econ (A).

Econ Courses:

Undergrad: Principles of Micro/Macro, Intermediate Micro/Macro, Stats for Econ, Econometrics, Monetary Theory, Game Theory, Advanced Macroeconomics. All As
Graduate: Microeconomic Theory I (A-), Econometrics I (A)

Other Courses: Intro to Programming/C++ (A).

Letters of Recommendation: Three full-time professors. I did research with two of them for over two years on a huge project. The other one I just took a class with.

Research Experience: RA as an undergrad for two years for two professors. Senior Thesis (Mentioned in the SoP, but it was not ready in time for the application)

Teaching Experience: Math Grader + Tutor for the last two years

Research Interests: Macro-Finance: Forecasting and Indexing

SOP: Pretty standard, I assume.

Acceptances: None

Waitlists: Stanford, UPenn, Northwestern

Rejections: Harvard, MIT, Stanford Business, UChicago, Chicago Booth, Berkeley, Princeton, Columbia, Yale, NYU, NYU Stern, Wharton, UCLA

Attending: Off to a Predoc at a top department. Although I am not happy with my results, I thought it was important to post them here for future applicants.

I know from the Stanford waitlist group that over 90% of people in a top Ph.D. have either a Masters or 2-year predoc. So, it is pretty reasonable that I could not get in this time. I also suspect that I was automatically put into the pile of applicants from my home country, and they are all two or three years older than me with a lot more research experience. If you are an international student at a US undergrad, know that your path will be more challenging than for Americans (I know one guy from my school that got into the top 2 with a weaker overall profile).

If you doubt if doing a predoc is worth it, you are not alone. It is two years of your life in an underpaid job (do not forget: you are giving up 200k you could have earned in the industry for 2/3 recommendation letters). All of that in preparation for yet another underpaid position for 5-6 more years. So, if you cannot get into a Ph.D. directly from an undergrad, stop for a bit and think if your love for economics and research is enough to put you in a stressful position until you are in/close to your 30s (for me it was).

Also, you cannot believe how crazily competitive it is to get into a predoc these days. The best ones (OI, SIERP, Chicago...) now have many applicants with predoc experience or masters. Most prestigious predocs also have their application deadline in December, so apply to them before knowing the results from your Ph.D. applications.

My two cents: it is sad to see where the Econ Ph.D. system is heading to. A few decades ago, you could have become a doctor at around 26. Now, it is becoming more and more common to see people finishing it when they are close to 32-35.

What would you have done differently?

My profile has some flaws (not perfect GRE, my writing sample was a 15-page class paper and not my Senior Thesis, A- in Grad Micro, etc.). Nonetheless, I think I did as most as I could have done in the last three years, and when I compare my profile to the ones from previous years, I was expecting better results. I came really close in some of the waitlists, but it was not enough. The path to getting a Ph.D. is rough (primarily for international students), so dive into it with caution.

SwissEconomist

Type of Undergrad: one Bachelor in Economics and one in Business Administration at one of the best European Business Schools

Undergrad GPA (Economics): 4.0 equivalent (Top 5% of Cohort)

Type of Grad: 2 Year Master in Economics at a Top 10 European Economics Department

Grad GPA: 4.0 equivalent (Top 5% of Cohort)

GRE: 165 quant

Research Experience: One year Research Assistant for a Math Prof. which does Research in Game Theory at a Top 10 University

Letters of Recommendation: One from a very well known Prof. with whom I wrote my Master Thesis, one from a Prof. with whom I wrote my Bachelor Thesis and one from the Math Prof. I assume all three where pretty strong.

Teaching Experience: TA for Intermediate Micro

Research Interests: Labor and Public Economics

Acceptances: Bonn, Zurich, Mannheim, St. Gallen

Rejections: LSE, UCL

Attending: Zurich

Comments/What would you have done differently? I messed up the GRE due to an unexpected illness. Without that I would have scored a much higher score. I guess that with my low GRE score I was probably automatically sorted out at UCL and LSE. Nevertheless Zurich was anyway my top choice so I'm very happy with the results.

Sweaty, need a shower

Undergrad GPA: 3.98

GRE: 169Q 163V

Math Courses: (all A except B+ in analysis) calc I-III, diff. eq., linear algebra, intro proofs, real analysis, intro stats, data analysis in R.

Econ Courses: (all A) intermediate micro and macro, intro and applied econometrics, labor, thesis sequence.

Research Experience: 2 independent research projects as an undergrad including a senior thesis. 6 months of a pre-doc, 6 months industry research work.

Letters of Recommendation: 2 from the advisors of my undergrad research, 1 from an econ professor who taught me twice. They were great advocates for me, and also kind. I know this helped.

Research Interests: applied micro, IO, labor

SOP: the usual, though letter writers said this was probably a strength of my application.

Acceptances: UCLA

Waitlists: UVA (eventually admitted, but declined)

Rejections: Harvard, Princeton, Yale, MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, Columbia, Northwestern, Penn, NYU Stern, Michigan, Duke, Brown, Cornell, UMN

Pending: NYU, UCSD, USC (I'm sure I'll be rejected, but they haven't actually told me so)

Attending: UCLA!

Comments: I was advised to apply to as many schools as I could and then more to play the numbers game. I think this was great advice. You really do only need one admit.

I would have prevented a global pandemic, prevented every unpredictable road block, and given myself infinite money and capacity for more math courses. In all seriousness, things have been tough the past couple years, things haven't gone perfectly, but I did my best given the circumstances and I can't ask more of myself. I am very lucky and very happy with how things worked out for me. I hope future applicants reading this can feel proud of everything they have accomplished, not obsess over every way their profile was imperfect, and not compare themselves to other people even when schools do this for us.

Type of Undergrad: Economics BA from a T50 program.

Undergrad GPA: 3.7 overall; 3.85 upper division

Type of Grad: No graduate degree

Grad GPA: No graduate GPA

GRE: 169Q/161V/5.0AWA

Math Courses: Real Analysis (A); Advanced Linear Algebra (A); Linear Algebra (A); Differential Equations (A); Methods of Analysis (A); Probability Theory (A-); Vector Calculus (A)

Econ Courses: Game Theory (A); Micro Theory (A); Advanced Micro Theory (B+); Econometrics (A); Advanced Econometrics (A); Senior Thesis (A)

Other Courses: Introduction to R (A); Introduction to Python (A); Graduate Level Introduction to Data Science (A)

Letters of Recommendation: Senior thesis advisor and two federal reserve economists

Research Experience: One year of in undergrad writing a senior thesis and working as an RA part time. Then another three years working as an RA for the Federal Reserve

Teaching Experience: TA for a course at Howard University.

Research Interests: Open minded. I find questions in applied micro and empirical corporate finance interesting.

SOP: Standard, not tailored

Other: A lot of service work

Acceptances: UCLA ($), UW-Madison ($$$$), BU ($$$), UNC Chapel Hill ($$), UT Austin ($$), UC Davis ($$)

Waitlists: UM Twin Cities, UMD College Park

Rejections: A lot LOL

Attending: UCLA

Don't tell your parents you've gotten into a program until you receive the offer letter. UC Davis gave me a informal acceptance and then moved me to a waitlist because too many people held onto their offers.

Stress less. If you work a 9-to-5, then take a week off to make your decision.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

× Pasted as rich text. Restore formatting

Only 75 emoji are allowed.

× Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead

× Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor

× You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Insert image from URL
Submit Reply
Existing user? Sign In
Online Users
Leaderboard
All Activity
Create New...

General Co – Chairs
Technical Program Committee

Steering Committee

General Call for Papers
Symposia and Special Sessions
Posters/Abstracts
Professional Workshops
Professional Posters/Demos
Paper EDAS submission
Author’s Guidelines
Timetable and Program
Keynote speakers
Invited speakers
Business Forum
Venue and Accommodation

Registration

Social Program
Travel and Visa info

Home / Authors / PhD Forum

PhD Forum Book of Abstracts is available at the link !

* * * Submission deadline extended to September 9, 2022 * * *

About the PhD Forum

The PhD Forum provides an opportunity for doctoral students to present their work (related to the SoftCOM 2022 conference topics) to a wider community of researchers from academia and industry. Its aim is also to encourage interaction and networking among doctoral students from different universities.

How it works

Doctoral students are invited to submit a two-page extended abstract for review and possible inclusion in the PhD Forum program.

The content of the submission should focus on student’s individual research work and doctoral thesis contribution – not the work of research team (or the project they are involved in) as a whole.

Here you can download the Call for Papers (PDF) , and further down on this page you can find the detailed instructions and templates for PhD Forum authors on how to prepare papers (extended-abstracts), posters, and presentations.

The sequence of events related to the PhD Forum is as follows. The prospective authors (doctoral students, together with their advisors) should submit a 2-page extended abstract (formatted according to the instructions) before the submission deadline, via EDAS .

All submissions will be reviewed, and once the review process is complete, the authors will receive a notification containing the reviewers’ comments and the review outcome (acceptance or rejection).

The authors of accepted submissions will be invited to submit the final version of the paper, revised according to the reviewers’ comments, as well as a poster and a pitch talk presentation , to be personally presented by the doctoral student at the PhD Forum event at the SoftCOM 2022 conference.

Review process

To keep within the time limits of PhD Forum as a whole, the number of PhD presentations/posters will be limited to 20. All submissions will be reviewed by the PhD Forum Program & Organizing Committee and/or other TPC members and reviewers involved in the main conference, based on relevance to the conference, innovativeness, and quality of presentation. All accepted and presented submissions will be included in the Book of Abstracts of the SoftCOM 2022 PhD Forum, to be published after the conference.

For authors of accepted presentations/posters, who already registered for the conference , the PhD Forum registration fee is waived (i. e., they are not required to do pay an extra registration).

For authors of accepted presentations/posters (not registered otherwise), the PhD Forum registration fee is 50 EUR and it includes: 1) PhD Forum participation; 2) Book of Abstracts (printed and electronic version); 3) access to other SoftCOM 2022 conference sessions, coffee breaks and conference luncheons.

For authors of accepted presentations/posters (not registered otherwise), who participate online-only , PhD Forum registration fee is reduced to 30 EUR and it includes: 1) PhD Forum participation; 2) Book of Abstracts (electronic version only); 3) online access to other SoftCOM 2022 conference sessions.

Registration for the PhD Forum will be available after the completion of the review process.

Maja Matijašević , University of Zagreb, Chair Dinko Begušić , University of Split Tihana Galinac-Grbac , Juraj Dobrila University of Pula Darko Huljenić , Ericsson Nikola Tesla Drago Žagar , Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek

Program & Organizing Committee

Maja Škiljo , University of Split, Chair Andrej Grgurić , Ericsson Nikola Tesla Petar Krivić , University of Zagreb Višnja Križanović , Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek Goran Mauša , University of Rijeka Reinhard Teschl , Graz University of Technology

Previous events

The 2022 PhD Forum is the seventh event in the series. The previous occurences were co-organized and co-located with the following ICT-related conferences taking place in Croatia:

1 st PhD Forum , at SoftCOM 2016, Split, September 22, 2016 ( Book of Abstracts ),
2 nd PhD Forum , at ConTEL 2017, Zagreb, June 28, 2017 ( Book of Abstracts ) ,
3 rd PhD Forum , at SST 2018, Osijek, October 11, 2018 ( Book of Abstracts ),
4 th PhD Forum , at SoftCOM 2019, Split, September 20, 2019 ( Book of Abstracts ),
5 th PhD Forum , at SoftCOM 2020, Split, September 18, 2020 ( Book of Abstracts ),
6 th PhD Forum , at ConTel 2021, Zagreb, July 2, 2021 ( Book of Abstracts ).

Instructions for PhD Forum authors

Doctoral students are invited to submit a two-page extended abstract (short paper) for review and possible inclusion in the PhD Forum program. The content of the submission should focus on the student’s individual research work and doctoral thesis contribution – not the work of the research team (or the project they are involved in) as a whole.

IMPORTANT DATES:

August 22, 2022 : Extended Abstracts, Due Extended/new deadline: September 6, 2022 : Extended Abstracts, Due September 13, 2022 : Notification of Acceptance September 9, 2022: Registration --> September 16, 2022 : Final Camera-Ready Abstracts, Due September 23, 2022 : PhD Forum Session within the SoftCOM program

Step-by-step guide for participation

A successful participation at the PhD Forum includes preparing a presentation of one’s doctoral thesis research in three given formats:

a 2-page extended abstract (short paper),
a 4-slide slide presentation for a 2-minute pitch talk, and,
a poster to be displayed and discussed in a poster session at the conference.

Step 1: Extended abstract for review

The extended abstracts should be formatted according to the SoftCOM 2022 regular paper format . The length of the extended abstract is limited to two (2) pages in total .

The extended abstract should contain the title, the name and the affiliations of the student and her/his advisor(s), the short summary of research goals/results (of maximum 150 words), the research topic presentation, graphical illustrations to aid the presentation, and the list of references.

The extended abstract should be submitted electronically before the submission deadline, via EDAS (please select the PhD Forum track from the SoftCOM 2022 main submission page). It is strongly advised to register the extended abstract in EDAS as soon as possible, to enable preliminary assignment of reviewers. The authors will still be able to freely modify all the paper related information, as many times as needed up until the actual start of the review process, after the submission deadline.

If an extended abstract is accepted, the authors will be invited to submit the final version , revised according to the reviewers’ comments, to be published in the SoftCOM 2022 PhD Forum Book of Abstracts after the conference. The final version should be submitted in the same way as the initial version for review, by using EDAS.

Quick links:

paper format
EDAS web page for paper submission .

Step 2: Poster

The authors of accepted submissions will be asked to prepare a poster , to be personally presented (by the doctoral student) at the PhD Forum.

The poster should be formatted according to the template, allowing it to be printed on standard A1 size paper (594 x 841 mm), portrait orientation), as well as exported to PDF format (using a standard A4 paper size), for virtual/online presentation.

poster template .

Step 3: Live (or online) presentation

The PhD Forum will be organized as a poster session, preceded by a fast-paced introduction by each student that offers a preview of the posters. Each student will be given a strictly-timed 2-minutes ’ slot to present a “pitch talk” about her/his research. The purpose of the pitch talk is to provide a brief outline of one’s doctoral research work, with the goal to raise awareness and generate further discussion over the poster session that follows next.

The slide presentation to accompany the pitch talk may contain at most four (4) slides . The first slide should provide the information on the presenter (title of the abstract, student’s name, advisor’s name, and respective affiliation(s) and contact e-mail addresses. The remaining three slides should cover the research motivation, problem description, methodology, and (preliminary) results.

presentation template .

Step 4: Poster session

The SoftCOM conference program, including the PhD Forum pitch talks and poster session, will take place at the conference venue and location (Radisson Blue, Split), with the option to participate online in case COVID-19 related travel restrictions.

In any case, the audience will have the opportunity to view the posters and informally discuss their content with the PhD student authors. This interaction may take place in the physical or virtual space, depending on the situation at the time of the conference. Instructions on how to attend will be sent to all registered participants once the program will have been finalized.

Best poster and best presentation awards

All posters will enter the competition for the best poster and best presentation. The winners will be elected by popular vote.

Conference begins in

Highlighted pages.

About Softcom 2022
Author’s Guidelines
SoftCOM 2022 papers
SoftCOM 2022 Photo Gallery

Enter your name and email address below to subscribe to our mailing list.

Name and surname

Introduction
Conclusions
Article Information

PHI indicates personal health information.

Ransomware attacks affecting multiple health care delivery organization types simultaneously appear in all relevant columns.

Each dot represents a ransomware attack on a health care delivery organization. The 84 health care delivery organizations that experienced a ransomware attack but did not submit information to the US Department of Health and Human Services were excluded.

eTable 1. Data Sources and Methodology for Ransomware Attack Characteristics

eTable 2. Search Terms for Ransomware Attack Characteristics

eTable 3. Ransomware Attack Count, by Category of Information

eTable 4. Count of Attacks for which Each Source Provided Information

eTable 5. Change (Presented as Odds Ratios and Incident Rate Ratios) in Characteristics of Ransomware Attacks, from 2016 to 2021

Ransomware Attacks, ED Visits and Inpatient Admissions in Targeted and Nearby Hospitals JAMA Research Letter May 29, 2024 This case-control study analyzes disruptive ransomware attacks against hospitals in California from 2014 to 2020 and emergency department (ED) and inpatient admissions in attacked and nearby hospitals. Rahi Abouk, PhD; David Powell, PhD
Errors in Figure 3B JAMA Health Forum Correction February 17, 2023

See More About

Select your interests.

Academic Medicine
Acid Base, Electrolytes, Fluids
Allergy and Clinical Immunology
American Indian or Alaska Natives
Anesthesiology
Anticoagulation
Art and Images in Psychiatry
Artificial Intelligence
Assisted Reproduction
Bleeding and Transfusion
Caring for the Critically Ill Patient
Challenges in Clinical Electrocardiography
Climate and Health
Climate Change
Clinical Challenge
Clinical Decision Support
Clinical Implications of Basic Neuroscience
Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology
Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Consensus Statements
Coronavirus (COVID-19)
Critical Care Medicine
Cultural Competency
Dental Medicine
Dermatology
Diabetes and Endocrinology
Diagnostic Test Interpretation
Drug Development
Electronic Health Records
Emergency Medicine
End of Life, Hospice, Palliative Care
Environmental Health
Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion
Facial Plastic Surgery
Gastroenterology and Hepatology
Genetics and Genomics
Genomics and Precision Health
Global Health
Guide to Statistics and Methods
Hair Disorders
Health Care Delivery Models
Health Care Economics, Insurance, Payment
Health Care Quality
Health Care Reform
Health Care Safety
Health Care Workforce
Health Disparities
Health Inequities
Health Policy
Health Systems Science
History of Medicine
Hypertension
Images in Neurology
Implementation Science
Infectious Diseases
Innovations in Health Care Delivery
JAMA Infographic
Law and Medicine
Leading Change
Less is More
LGBTQIA Medicine
Lifestyle Behaviors
Medical Coding
Medical Devices and Equipment
Medical Education
Medical Education and Training
Medical Journals and Publishing
Mobile Health and Telemedicine
Narrative Medicine
Neuroscience and Psychiatry
Notable Notes
Nutrition, Obesity, Exercise
Obstetrics and Gynecology
Occupational Health
Ophthalmology
Orthopedics
Otolaryngology
Pain Medicine
Palliative Care
Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
Patient Care
Patient Information
Performance Improvement
Performance Measures
Perioperative Care and Consultation
Pharmacoeconomics
Pharmacoepidemiology
Pharmacogenetics
Pharmacy and Clinical Pharmacology
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Physical Therapy
Physician Leadership
Population Health
Primary Care
Professional Well-being
Professionalism
Psychiatry and Behavioral Health
Public Health
Pulmonary Medicine
Regulatory Agencies
Reproductive Health
Research, Methods, Statistics
Resuscitation
Rheumatology
Risk Management
Scientific Discovery and the Future of Medicine
Shared Decision Making and Communication
Sleep Medicine
Sports Medicine
Stem Cell Transplantation
Substance Use and Addiction Medicine
Surgical Innovation
Surgical Pearls
Teachable Moment
Technology and Finance
The Art of JAMA
The Arts and Medicine
The Rational Clinical Examination
Tobacco and e-Cigarettes
Translational Medicine
Trauma and Injury
Treatment Adherence
Ultrasonography
Users' Guide to the Medical Literature
Vaccination
Venous Thromboembolism
Veterans Health
Women's Health
Workflow and Process
Wound Care, Infection, Healing

Others Also Liked

Download PDF
X Facebook More LinkedIn

Neprash HT , McGlave CC , Cross DA, et al. Trends in Ransomware Attacks on US Hospitals, Clinics, and Other Health Care Delivery Organizations, 2016-2021. JAMA Health Forum. 2022;3(12):e224873. doi:10.1001/jamahealthforum.2022.4873

Manage citations:

Permissions

Trends in Ransomware Attacks on US Hospitals, Clinics, and Other Health Care Delivery Organizations, 2016-2021

1 University of Minnesota, School of Public Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota
2 University of Florida, College of Public Health and Health Professions, Gainesville, Florida
3 University of Minnesota, Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota
4 University of Minnesota, Law School, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Research Letter Ransomware Attacks, ED Visits and Inpatient Admissions in Targeted and Nearby Hospitals Rahi Abouk, PhD; David Powell, PhD JAMA
Correction Errors in Figure 3B JAMA Health Forum

Question How frequently do health care delivery organizations experience ransomware attacks, and how have the characteristics of ransomware attacks changed over time?

Findings In this cohort study of 374 ransomware attacks, the annual number of ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations more than doubled from 2016 to 2021, exposing the personal health information of nearly 42 million patients. During the study period, ransomware attacks exposed larger quantities of personal health information and grew more likely to affect large organizations with multiple facilities.

Meaning The study results suggest that ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations are increasing in frequency and sophistication; disruptions to care during ransomware attacks may threaten patient safety and outcomes.

Importance Anecdotal evidence suggests that health care delivery organizations face a growing threat from ransomware attacks that are designed to disrupt care delivery and may consequently threaten patient outcomes.

Objective To quantify the frequency and characteristics of ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations.

Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study used data from the Tracking Healthcare Ransomware Events and Traits database to examine the number and characteristics of ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations from 2016 to 2021. Logistic and negative binomial regression quantified changes over time in the characteristics of ransomware attacks that affected health care delivery organizations.

Main Outcomes and Measures Date of ransomware attack, public reporting of ransomware attacks, personal health information (PHI) exposure, status of encrypted/stolen data following the attack, type of health care delivery organization affected, and operational disruption during the ransomware attack.

Results From January 2016 to December 2021, 374 ransomware attacks on US health care delivery organizations exposed the PHI of nearly 42 million patients. From 2016 to 2021, the annual number of ransomware attacks more than doubled from 43 to 91. Almost half (166 [44.4%]) of ransomware attacks disrupted the delivery of health care, with common disruptions including electronic system downtime (156 [41.7%]), cancellations of scheduled care (38 [10.2%]), and ambulance diversion (16 [4.3%]). From 2016 to 2021, ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations increasingly affected large organizations with multiple facilities (annual marginal effect [ME], 0.08; 95% CI, 0.05-0.10; P < .001), exposed the PHI of more patients (ME, 66 385.8; 95% CI, 3400.5-129 371.2; P = .04), were less likely to be restored from data backups (ME, −0.04; 95% CI, −0.06 to −0.01; P = .002), were more likely to exceed mandatory reporting timelines (ME, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.03-0.08; P < .001), and increasingly were associated with delays or cancellations of scheduled care (ME, 0.02; 95% CI, 0-0.05; P = .02).

Conclusions and Relevance This cohort study of ransomware attacks documented growth in their frequency and sophistication. Ransomware attacks disrupt care delivery and jeopardize information integrity. Current monitoring/reporting efforts provide limited information and could be expanded to potentially yield a more complete view of how this growing form of cybercrime affects the delivery of health care.

As health care delivery organizations have increased their reliance on health information technology, they have also increased their exposure to new cybersecurity risks, such as ransomware attacks. Ransomware is a type of malicious software that prevents users from accessing their electronic systems and demands a ransom to restore access. 1 , 2 Ransomware attacks are one cause of health care data breaches, which are becoming more common, 3 - 5 and are increasingly attributed to external causes (ie, hacking) rather than internal negligence or malfeasance (ie, misplaced laptops or inappropriately accessed data). 6 Unlike other data breaches, which often seek to steal data, ransomware attacks are purposefully designed to disrupt business operations, thereby motivating the attacked organization to make the demanded payment.

Although ransomware attacks have existed for years, the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other government entities warn that widespread use of ransomware attacks against health care delivery organizations coincides with the COVID-19 pandemic. 7 - 9 While some prominent ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations have received considerable media attention, 10 - 12 to our knowledge, there is presently no systematic documentation of the extent and effect of ransomware attacks. News coverage of individual attacks suggests that ransomware attacks are substantially disruptive to care delivery, with reports of computers and electronic health records being disabled or encrypted, 13 - 17 clinicians forced to document care using pen and paper, 13 , 17 appointments and surgeries delayed or canceled, 11 , 14 , 16 , 18 - 20 emergency departments forced to divert ambulances, 11 , 14 , 15 , 17 , 20 and practice infrastructure so damaged that some practices have opted to close rather than try to restore systems. 21 Such instances of operational disruptions to the delivery of health care have been followed by some positing that ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations may impose a human cost in addition to a financial one by jeopardizing patient safety and outcomes. 22 , 23 In this study, we used a database of ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations to quantify and describe this growing phenomenon.

To conduct this study, we created a data source called the Tracking Healthcare Ransomware Events and Traits (THREAT) database and reported findings from the database. The THREAT database combines proprietary data provided by HackNotice (a cybersecurity threat intelligence company that helps businesses identify and respond to attacks) with data from the US Department of Health and Human Services Office of Civil Rights (HHS OCR) Data Breach Portal. The latter contains publicly available information that is collected when Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act–covered entities report breaches of protected health information (PHI), as mandated by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009. This study followed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology ( STROBE ) reporting guidelines. This study was determined to be exempt from review and informed consent by the University of Minnesota institutional review board (common rule, category 5).

The THREAT database began with every corporate cybersecurity breach within the HackNotice system. HackNotice populated this database by crawling search engines (ie, systematically querying certain terms) and web-scraping sources, such as publicly reported databases (ie, the HHS OCR Breach Portal and other state-based reporting), search engines, news outlets, trade publications, and forums on the dark web (ie, the part of the internet requiring the use of specialized encrypted browsing technology) on which hackers advertise stolen data for sale and describe the success of their exploits. Data fields recorded in this system included organization name, date of breach, type of breach (eg, ransomware, website defacement), a narrative description of the breach, and source documentation (eg, news, official reporting, dark web).

From the list of HackNotice cybersecurity breaches, we identified breaches that occurred between 2016 and 2021 for which the affected organization was a health care delivery organization operating in the US. This involved web searches for each affected company’s name and/or domain. Our definition of “health care delivery organization” was intentionally expansive, including hospitals, clinics, diagnostic laboratories, dental offices, substance use treatment centers, pharmacies, emergency medical services, and post–acute care facilities.

To determine whether each data breach involved a ransomware attack, we searched supplemental sources, including press releases issued by the attacked organization, public disclosures (ie, posted copies of form letters sent to patients whose PHI was exposed during the attack), local news reports, and health care trade press coverage. Data breaches were deemed ransomware attacks if supplemental sources included mention of “ransomware” or other keywords indicating a ransomware attack (eAppendix in the Supplement ).

To quantify the number of individuals whose PHI was exposed during a ransomware attack, we relied on publicly reported information from the HHS OCR Data Breach portal. 4 We matched attacks in the THREAT database to the HHS OCR database manually using the covered entity’s name, state, and date of breach reporting (eAppendix in the Supplement ). Organizations are statutorily required to notify HHS of a data breach and the number of individuals affected within 60 calendar days of breach discovery. 24 This information is made publicly available on the HHS website when the reported breach affects the PHI of 500 or more individuals. We additionally quantified whether a ransomware attack remained unreported to HHS OCR and the number of days that elapsed from the attack date to the reporting date.

Having identified the ransomware attacks affecting health care delivery organizations in the HackNotice data, we searched the previously mentioned supplemental sources and added additional details to the THREAT database for every attack, including attack breadth and health care delivery organization type. Attack breadth was defined as whether the ransomware attack affected a single or multiple health care facilities. We also relied on supplemental data sources and the attacked organization’s web page to identify health care settings affected, categorizing delivery organizations as hospital, ambulatory surgery center, clinic, dental, mental/behavioral health, post–acute care, and other (eg, emergency medical services clinicians, plastic surgery centers, and infusion centers). eTable 1 in the Supplement provides additional detail on how we categorized health care delivery organization type and attack breadth.

We collected reports on the type and duration of operational disruptions that occurred during ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations. Common operational disruptions included ambulance diversion, canceled appointments/surgeries, and electronic system downtime. When available, we cataloged the duration of any operational interruption, as measured in days. Since supplemental sources frequently referenced a date at which operations were fully restored, we calculated the operational disruption duration as the number of days that elapsed from the date of the ransomware attack (ie, typically the date of the ransomware attack discovery; ransomware actors frequently have access for weeks or months before using malware that hinders operations) to the date of restoration. eTables 1 to 4 in the Supplement provide additional details on how we quantified operational disruptions and sources used.

We calculated the annual frequency of ransomware attacks and descriptive statistics for characteristics of those attacks, including details of public reporting of PHI exposure, status of encrypted/stolen data, health care delivery organization type(s) affected, and operational disruptions. To quantify changes over time in binary outcome variables, we used logistic regression models with the year of the ransomware attack as a continuous variable. To obtain average annual marginal effects, we used the margins command in Stata, version 16.1 (StataCorp). For 2 count-based outcome variables (ie, count of individuals whose PHI was exposed and count of days during which care delivery was disrupted by the ransomware attack), we used negative binomial regression models with the year of the attack as a continuous variable. All regression analyses used Huber-White robust standard errors to assess statistical significance, which was defined as P < .05. Analyses were conducted from May 2022 to October 2022.

During the study period (2016-2021), we documented 374 ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations that exposed the PHI of 41 987 751 million individuals ( Figure 1 ). From 2016 to 2021, the annual number of ransomware attacks more than doubled, from 43 to 91. Personal health information exposure increased more than 11-fold, from approximately 1.3 million in 2016 to more than 16.5 million in 2021. A total of 84 ransomware attacks (22.5%) lacked information on PHI exposure, as they did not appear in the HHS OCR database ( Table 1 ). Of the 290 ransomware attacks that were reported to HHS, most (203 [54.3% percent of all attacks]) were reported outside of the legislated reporting window of 60 days following the attack.

Across all 374 attacks, approximately 1 in 5 (20.6%) health care organizations were reportedly able to restore data from backups ( Table 1 ). For 59 ransomware attacks (15.8%), there was evidence that ransomware actors had made some or all of the stolen PHI public, typically by posting it on dark web forums where stolen data are advertised for sale by including a subset of records.

Clinics (of all specialties) were the most common health care delivery organization type to experience a ransomware attack ( Table 1 ), followed by hospitals, other delivery organization types, ambulatory surgical centers, mental/behavioral health organizations, dental practices, and post–acute care organizations. More than half (198 [52.9%]) of all ransomware attacks affected multiple facilities within the attacked organization.

While all ransomware attacks are presumed to have some organizational effect in terms of activating system safeguards and leadership response, we documented evidence of care delivery disruptions during 166 ransomware attacks (44.4%) ( Table 1 ). A total of 32 attacks (8.6%) were associated with a disruption exceeding 2 weeks. Types of care disruptions included electronic system downtime (156 [41.7%]), delays or cancellations of scheduled care (38 [10.2%]), and ambulance diversion (16 [4.3%]). Ransomware attack-induced operational disruptions varied by health care delivery organization type, with hospitals most likely to experience a disruption during a ransomware attack ( Figure 2 ).

The characteristics of ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations changed during the study period ( Table 2 ; eTable 5 in the Supplement ). With each year, ransomware attacks exposed the PHI of more patients (annual marginal effect [ME], 66 385.8; 95% CI, 3400.5-129 371.2; P = .04), a trend that was not limited to any single health care delivery organization type ( Figure 3 A). Over time, ransomware attacks were more likely to be reported late to the HHS OCR (ME, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.03-0.08; P < .001), and the number of attacks reported very late (ie, more than twice the statutory limit of 60 days from the attack) increased substantially in 2020 and 2021 ( Figure 3 B).

From 2016 to 2021, the likelihood of health care organizations restoring ransomware-encrypted or stolen data from backups decreased (ME, −0.04; 95% CI, −0.06 to −0.01; P = .002), and more attacks were associated with some or all of the stolen PHI becoming public (ME, 0.03; 95% CI, 0-0.06; P = .02; Table 2 ; eTable 1 in the Supplement ). During the study period, the probability that a ransomware attack affected multiple facilities simultaneously (ie, a larger organization) increased by eight percentage points annually (ME, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.05-0.10; P < .001). Mental/behavioral health care delivery organizations (ME, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01-0.06; P = .001) were increasingly likely to experience ransomware attacks. While there was no statistically significant increase over time in operational disruptions overall, there was an increase in the likelihood that an attack was associated with delays or cancellations to scheduled care (ME, 0.02; 95% CI, 0.00-0.05; P = .02) and an increase (statistically significant only at P < .10) in the share of attacks that involved ambulance diversions (ME, 0.01; 95% CI, −0.0 to 0.03; P = .09).

In this cohort study conducted with data from 2016 to 2021, we documented 374 ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations that affected the PHI of nearly 42 million patients. The growing number of attacks affecting large entities (those with multiple facilities) and the associated growth in PHI exposed (along with the diminishing likelihood that an organization could restore data from backups) suggest that ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations have increased in sophistication as well as in frequency. To our knowledge, these findings represent the only census of ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations. However, the study’s estimates of magnitude align with findings in the gray literature, and the trend over time is consistent with reports that ransomware actors increasingly targeted health care delivery organizations during the COVID-19 pandemic. 7 , 25 , 26

Despite careful research, many of the statistics reported in this article are likely underestimates due to underreporting. For example, 1 in 5 ransomware attacks were not present in the HHS OCR database. This absence may be due to low PHI exposure (ie, attacks affecting fewer than 500 individuals need not appear in the HHS OCR public database) or, alternatively, because of confusion about whether ransomware attacks must be reported through official channels when they involve encryption, but not actual removal, of data from computer systems. Guidance from HHS states that when a ransomware attack occurs, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act–covered entities and their business associates need not report it if they can demonstrate a low probability that PHI has been exposed. 1 Additionally, current reporting requirements lack either an enforcement mechanism or a penalty for noncompliance. Even when an entity reports an attack, there is no sanction for doing so outside of the legislated 60-day window, which may explain the high proportion (53.5%) of ransomware attacks with delayed reporting. Rather than health care organizations self-correcting as ransomware attacks become more common, we found an increase over time in the share of attacks that were reported late. Missing attacks and delayed reporting suggest opportunities for legislators who wish to strengthen data collection around cyberattacks, particularly ransomware, so as to shape an informed and well-targeted policy response.

Other information that is currently not tracked could potentially be incorporated into the existing reporting system. For example, policy makers could require the reporting of operational disruptions (eg, whether the health care delivery organization activated electronic health record downtime protocols and/or diverted ambulances) that occurred during a cyberattack. Administrative records, such as Medicare claims data, might also be used for similar purposes if the operational disruptions during ransomware attacks leave an identifiable signature. This approach might enable data collection without imposing additional reporting requirements on health care delivery organizations during an already challenging time. However, further research is needed to establish whether ransomware attacks create identifiable patterns in administrative data.

As is, this study’s findings regarding operational disruptions required individual research into each attack. Even with this constraint, we documented disruptions to care delivery during nearly half of all ransomware attacks, but the scope of the problem is likely larger. The most frequent disruption was to electronic systems, which frequently forced a switch to paper charting. Other documented disruptions included ambulance diversion and canceled appointments. These operational disruptions may harm patients, especially those experiencing emergencies and for whom timely treatment is crucial. 9 Further study is needed to quantify an empirical association between ransomware attacks and patient outcomes.

Additional legislative activity concerns the ransom itself, with proposals to mandate disclosure (of ransom demands, whether a payment was made, and for what amount) and potentially even banning the payment of ransoms. 27 , 28 The FBI strongly recommends that businesses not acquiesce to ransom demands in the event of a ransomware attacks, since complying with ransom demands incentivizes ransomware actors to continue targeting health care organizations. Going a step further, in 1 well-documented ransomware attack, law enforcement deliberately withheld the decryption key for nearly 3 weeks while planning an operation to disrupt the ransomware actors involved. 29 To properly weigh law enforcement’s long-term deterrence goals against short-term patient safety goals, it is crucial to understand the association of ransomware attacks with patient safety and whether paying the ransom shortens the operational disruption. 22 While it is intuitive to think that paying the ransom shortens the duration of any operational disruption, this is not necessarily the case; there are well-documented examples of follow-up ransom demands and nonfunctional decryption keys provided after ransom payments have been made. 30 Additional ransom payment disclosure requirements would enable a better understanding of the potential tradeoff between financial cost and operational disruption duration.

Of equal if not more importance is identifying actions that health care delivery organizations can take to defend themselves effectively against ransomware attacks. Research suggests that health care delivery organizations are very susceptible to phishing emails that deceive insiders into giving access to hackers, 31 and such emails are a common entry point for ransomware attacks. Existing cybersecurity recommendations require substantial time and money that many, but especially the most vulnerable rural and safety net health care delivery organizations, may not realistically have. 1 , 32 Current estimates suggest that cybersecurity activities represent less than 10% of existing health system information technology budgets. 33 To motivate increased investment, rigorous research is needed to identify actions that successfully thwart ransomware and other cybersecurity attacks on health care delivery organizations.

This study had several limitations. First, we likely omitted some ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations. However, we believe that our database is the most comprehensive accounting of major health care ransomware attacks available for the period between 2016 and 2021. To be missing from the THREAT database, a ransomware attack would have needed to go unreported to HHS OCR, remain undetected by HackNotice web crawler surveillance and monitoring of dark web forums, and have received no press coverage in local news or health care trade publications. We believe this is most likely for ransomware attacks on smaller organizations, organizations in small geographic jurisdictions and/or organizations in states without mandated disclosure of data breaches, organizations without a hospital, and in scenarios in which the organization paid the demanded ransom quickly. The more likely scenario for omission of a ransomware attack from the THREAT database is misclassification. Events may have been ransomware attacks but only contained mention of malware or cyberattack, without discussion of any payment demand. To avoid false positives, these would not have been included in the THREAT database. Further research, including additional data sources, potentially in collaboration with the relevant federal entities (ie, the FBI, HHS OCR, the Health Sector Cybersecurity Coordination Center, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency), is needed to validate this study’s findings.

Second, we have no insight into attempted but unsuccessful ransomware attacks (ie, a situation in which no one clicked on the phishing email link that would have compromised the system). Thus, we cannot comment on the traits of health care delivery organizations who avoid this type of cybercrime. Relatedly, we cannot attribute changes in the characteristics of ransomware attacks over time to changes in whom hackers target, the types of malware used, the market structure of health care delivery organizations (ie, as consolidation produces larger organizations, ransomware attacks are mechanically more likely to affect them), or to changes in organizational susceptibility to such cyberattacks and use of cybersecurity measures. Fourth, we likely underestimated the severity of operational disruptions and PHI exposure, as health care delivery organizations may try not to publicize these details. However, an increase in news coverage of ransomware attacks during the study period might bias us toward finding an increase in the sophistication of ransomware attacks. We noted that measures of attack sophistication and severity from multiple sources (ie, PHI exposure from the HHS OCR Data Breach Portal and operational disruptions covered by news/trade publications) yielded similar results. Fifth and finally, we could not say whether or how ransomware disruptions affect patients seeking care during an attack. Quantifying this remains a crucial area for future work.

The results of this cohort study suggest that from 2016 to 2021, ransomware attacks on health care delivery organizations increased in frequency and sophistication. These attacks exposed PHI and frequently disrupted health care delivery, but further research is needed to more precisely understand the operational and clinical care consequences of these disruptions. As policy makers craft legislation aimed at countering the threat of ransomware attacks across multiple industries, we urge them to focus on the specific needs of health care delivery organizations, for which operational disruptions may carry substantial implications for the quality and safety of patient care.

Accepted for Publication: November 1, 2022.

Published: December 29, 2022. doi:10.1001/jamahealthforum.2022.4873

Corresponding Author: Hannah T. Neprash, PhD, Division of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, 420 Delaware St, SE MMC 729, Minneapolis, MN 55455 ( [email protected] ).

Correction: This article was corrected on February 17, 2023, to fix errors in Figure 3.

Author Contributions: Dr Neprash had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Concept and design: Neprash, McGlave, Huling, Rozenshtein, Nikpay.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Neprash, McGlave, Cross, Virnig, Puskarich.

Drafting of the manuscript: Neprash, Nikpay.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.

Statistical analysis: Neprash, McGlave, Huling.

Administrative, technical, or material support: McGlave, Rozenshtein, Nikpay.

Supervision: Neprash, Nikpay.

Other - methodological input: Cross.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Additional Contributions: Ash Brizuela, BA, Benjamin Weideman, BA, Dana Varughese, BS, and Yazeed Abdelhay, BS (University of Minnesota), served as paid research assistants who assisted in the creation of the Tracking Healthcare Ransomware Events and Traits database under the supervision of Dr Neprash.

NEWSLETTER SIGNUP

! SAVE THE DATE !

The Psychedelics Business Forum

Event overview, in partnership with.

NOVEMBER 15th, 2022

At this exclusive one-day Psychedelics Business Forum, we heard from experts in Psychedelics covering a variety of topics including:

– The current state of Psychedelics – Investment trends – The latest research and how it relates to your business – Commercialization timelines – Indigenous inclusion and how to be an advocate – Lessons learned from existing Psychedelics companies – Conservation and much more

Passes start at $349

MISSED THE 2022 FORUM? CLICK TO ACCESS THE SESSIONS >>

Featured Speakers

Join these entrepreneurs, thought-leaders, and industry advocates as they share their perspectives on the developments, opportunities and challenges with in the exciting industry of psychedelics.

Bethany Gomez has established herself as a trailblazer in emerging markets, with a focus on cannabis, CBD and wellness. As the Managing Director and Co-Founder of Brightfield Group, she has cemented the company’s position as an industry leader by emphasizing data-driven insights and compelling narratives. Through her leadership, Brightfield has played a significant role in the development of nascent industries like cannabis, CBD, and other innovative CPGs. ‍ Bethany has been featured and quoted in numerous media outlets including The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, CNN, Bloomberg, Yahoo! Finance and more.

Bethany Gomez

Managing Director, Brightfield Group

Amanda Reiman, PhD, is the Chief Knowledge Officer at New Frontier Data and the Founder of Personal Plants.

Dr. Reiman is a social ethnobotanist and has been studying the relationship between cannabis, people and greater society for over 20 years. She is the Founder of Personal Plants, a platform designed to help people develop healthy, balanced relationships with psychoactive plants and the Chief Knowledge Officer for New Frontier Data, an analytics company serving the legal cannabis industry. Dr. Reiman earned her PhD in Social Welfare from the University of California and conducted one of the first research studies on medical cannabis patients and the use of cannabis as a substitute for alcohol and other drugs. She currently resides in Ukiah, CA with her partner Sean, their 3 cats and 2 dogs.

Amanda Reiman

Chief Knowledge Officer at New Frontier Data, Founder at Personal Plants

Named one of Fortune magazine’s 7 Most Powerful People in America’s Marijuana Industry, Ricardo Baca is a 25-year veteran journalist, Clio Awards juror, keynote speaker, two-time TEDx veteran, Marketer of the Year and drug policy futurist. He served as The Denver Post’s first-ever marijuana editor and founded news vertical The Cannabist, where he extensively covered the advent of adult-use cannabis and related issues across the country and around the world, as seen in the feature documentary Rolling Papers (Netflix). In 2016, Ricardo launched Grasslands: A Journalism-Minded Agency to work directly with business leaders in highly regulated industries, including cannabis and psychedelics. Named Marketer of the Year by AdCann in 2019 and 2021, Ricardo has received numerous accolades for his trailblazing work throughout the media paradigm, and continues to columnize for AdWeek, mg and other publications. Ricardo is considered to be the world’s first and “most prestigious” marijuana editor; one of Brookings Institution’s 12 Key People to Watch in Marijuana Policy; one of Time magazine’s 140 best Twitter feeds; one of Sensi magazine’s 24 Cannabis Pioneers Who Matter.

Ricardo Baca

CEO & Founder, Grasslands

Chris Claussen is a visionary thinker and creative problem solver with over 25 years’ experience in startups, operations, marketing, and new product innovation. The past decade having been immersed in the science of brain health and cognitive function, focused on new product development, and creating innovative delivery methods in the mushroom and functional foods space to help promote optimal wellness. Brain health mission driven in devoting extensive time to researching the relationship between functional, functional, and psychedelic mushrooms on cognitive performance and mental wellbeing.

Chris Claussen

Co-Founder & Chief Innovation Officer, First Person

Ariel Clark (she/they) is co-founder of Clark Howell LLP, a women-steered business, corporate and regulatory law firm focused on cannabis and psychedelics. She also co-founded the Psychedelic Bar Association, serves on the Board, and on the Religious Use and Ethics Committees. She is co-creating a 2023 series on Law & Ethics: The Psychedelics Industry & Indigenous Peoples. Ariel is Odawa Anishinaabe and walks the Red Road. After practicing Indian Law and working with cannabis clients in California’s Bay Area, she started her own firm in 2010, to be of service to the plants and communities she is in deep connection with. Clark Howell LLP is actively engaged in the conversation about psychedelic lawyering, and helping to shape policy that emphasizes open source, ethical business models that honor the Earth, Peoples, and lineages, and reimagines a new role for capitalism in commercialization. Ariel has a Bachelors of Arts from University of Michigan in Religious Studies (2000) and a JD from Berkeley Law School (2005).

Ariel Clark

Principal, Clark Howell LLP

Scarlet Masius is Head of Community at Tactogen, a public benefit corporation that is developing a next-generation of MDMA-like medicines. Prior to joining they ran a creative consultancy, working with MAPS, Esalen, Omidyar Network and other orgs to build creative and participatory communities. They are trained as a psychedelic peer support specialist, and care deeply about having meaningful education, training and harm reduction present in the evolving psychedelic ecosystem.

Scarlet Masius

Head of Community, Tactogen

Sean T. McAllister is an attorney specializing in the therapeutic, regulatory, business, and religious freedom aspects of psychedelic medicines and therapies. His work in psychedelics has included: Advising doctors, therapists and licensed professional on psychedelic assisted therapy; Licensure defense of doctors and therapists grieved for psychedelic therapy; Advising clients looking to use psychedelics for religious purposes; Seeking DEA licensure for companies to manufacture Schedule I drugs lawfully in the United States; Steering committee member on and drafter of Colorado’s Proposition 122 Natural Medicine Health Act; Executive Officer of the Denver Psilocybin Mushroom Policy Review Panel; General Counsel for the Zendo Project Inc.; Legal advisor to Naropa University’s Psychedelic Therapy Program; Legal advisor to MAPS; Board of Directors for the Chacruna Institute for Psychedelic Plant Medicines; and Board of Directors of the Board of Psychedelic Medicine and Therapies. Sean is licensed to practice law in Colorado and California, but consults with clients nationwide where ethically allowed.

Sean McAllister

Attorney, McAllister Law Office, PC

Courtney Barnes is a devoted social justice attorney and trailblazer in drug policy reform. She serves as Counsel at the law firm, Feldman Legal Advisors PLLC, where she specializes in advising clients on compliance and risk management in emerging industries. In addition to her legal practice, Courtney provides a variety of advisory services to the psychedelics ecosystem. She serves as Policy Advisor for the Mind Army, General Counsel for the Society for Psychedelic Outreach Reform and Education (SPORE), and Advisory Board Member of Heroic Hearts Project. Courtney was a lead drafter of Denver’s Psilocybin Decriminalization Initiative (the nation’s first successful voter-initiated psychedelic policy reform ordinance) and has extensive experience drafting state and local policy relating to the regulation of cannabis and psychedelics. She is licensed to practice law in California, Colorado, and Texas.

Courtney Barnes

Counsel, Feldman Legal Advisors PLLC

Born in Ramaytush Ohlone territory (San Francisco, CA) Dr. Somerville is a mother, activist scholar and healer whose work is intentional in organizing, cooperative development, healing from trauma, and advancing decolonized principles and practices in organizational spaces. Dr. Somerville is trained in clinical and liberatory based healing strategies and draws upon these approaches in her work with clients and communities. She is a lifelong learner and carries this interest into the veins of her approaches to organizational development, leadership, organizing and her work as a healer. She is a proud graduate of the University of California at Santa Cruz (BA Sociology, Political Science) and Boston University (MSW – Human Resources Management) and earned her PhD in community psychology at National Louis University.

Deidra Somerville

Former Executive Director at Alchemy Community Therapy Center

Graham Pechenik is a registered patent attorney and the founder of Calyx Law, a law firm specializing in cannabis and psychedelics related intellectual property. Graham has a BS from UC San Diego, where he chose his Cognitive Neuroscience and Biochemistry majors after his first psychedelic experiences inspired deep curiosity about the bases for changes in consciousness, and a JD from New York University, where he initially pursued interests in bioethics and cognitive liberty. After a decade at large law firms obtaining, defending, and challenging patents for Fortune 500 companies across the agricultural, chemical, pharmaceutical, biotech, and technology industries, including working on several landmark patent cases both at trial and on appeal, Graham started Calyx Law in 2016 as the first patent law boutique in California to focus on the cannabis industry. Currently Graham works with cannabis and psychedelics ventures to design and implement their IP strategies, and with venture funds to diligence investment opportunities in these spaces. Graham is also editor-at-large of Psychedelic Alpha, where he writes about psychedelics IP, provides data for patent trackers, and maintains a psychedelics legalization and decriminalization tracker, he is the founding steward of the IP Committee of the Psychedelic Bar Association, where he is also on the Board of Directors, and he is a member of Chacruna’s Council for the Protection of Sacred Plants. An Oakland, California native, Graham has been a longtime advocate of cannabis reform, since getting involved in the campaign for Proposition 215 in 1996. Graham currently lives in San Francisco.

Graham Pechenik

Founder & Registered Patent Attorney, Calyx Law

Joe Moore co-founded Psychedelics Today in 2015 with Kyle Buller. As CEO, Joe has created one of the world’s best known psychedelic podcasts, blogs and training platforms. Joe combines twenty years of avid research and training in psychedelics with twenty years of experience in software and multinational project management. Joe is an expert in transpersonal breathwork and much sought after international speaker on the intersecting subjects of psychedelic medicine and healing, breathwork, drug policy, medical innovation, international justice and environmentalism.

Co-Founder & CEO, Psychedelics Today

Josh Hardman is Founder and Editor of Psychedelic Alpha, a newsletter, web resource and boutique consultancy. There, he spends most of his time exploring the curious intersection of psychedelics and business, sharing regular updates on the space and working with a group of subject-matter experts to maintain a number of free resources and datasets to help individuals and organizations make sense of this burgeoning field.

Josh Hardman

Founder and Editor, Psychedelic Alpha

Katherine MacLean, PhD, is a writer, research scientist, mother, educator, and adventure-seeker. She has spent the past two decades studying the effects of mindfulness meditation (at UC Davis) and psychedelics (at John’s Hopkins). Her debut memoir about psychedelics, grief and parenthood – Midnight Water – is now available in print and audio formats.

Katherine MacLean

Author, Scientist & Educator, Mothership Media, LLC

Nykol Bailey Rice, CRNA, PMHNP, is educated as both a Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist (Westminster in Salt Lake City, UT) as well as a Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioner (University of Cincinnati, OH). She has been operating Boise Ketamine Clinic since 2015. She has personally facilitated thousands of ketamine infusions and is passionate about providing a high-quality, collaborative ketamine course. Nykol completed a full three-year board term for the American Society of Ketamine Physicians, Practitioners and Psychoanalysts, where she helped to draft a set of standards and ethics for therapeutic ketamine use. Nykol then completed a year-long certificate program for non-ordinary states’ work with Integrative Psychiatry Institute. Her practice involves most routes of ketamine administration and various types of ketamine assisted therapy options.

Nykol Bailey Rice

Founder, Boise Ketamine Clinic

Paul F. Austin is one of the most prominent voices in the world of psychedelics. As the founder of Third Wave, he has educated millions on the importance of safe and effective psychedelic experiences. A pioneer at the intersection of psychedelics, personal transformation, and professional success, his work has been featured in Forbes, Rolling Stone, and the BBC’s Worklife. Paul helps leaders, creatives, and pioneers leverage psychedelics for exponential personal growth and professional development. He views psychedelics as a skill refined through mentorship, courageous exploration, and intentional use. Learning how to master this skill will be crucial in the story of humanity’s present-future evolution.”

Paul F. Austin

CEO & Founder of Third Wave & Psychedelic Coaching Institute

Philippe Lucas, PhD, is a cannabis and psychedelic researcher, a lifelong patient access advocate, and President of SABI Mind, a clinic group providing access to psychedelic-assisted therapy in the treatment of mental health, pain and substance use disorder. Philippe was a founding Board member of the Multidisciplinary Association of Psychedelic Studies Canada and co-founder of the Victoria Association of Psychedelic Studies, and he is the Primary Investigator of the Canadian Psychedelic Survey (2022) and the Global Psychedelic Survey (2023), and previously coordinated a prospective observational study of ayahuasca as a treatment for trauma and addiction in cooperation with a BC indigenous Band. More recently, Philippe worked as VP, Global Patient Research & Access at Tilray, where he oversaw a comprehensive international clinical and observational cannabis research program. Philippe has been invited to present his research before the Canadian House of Commons and Senate on numerous occasions, and has worked with governments around the globe to develop evidence-based drug policies. He has received a number of accolades for his patient research and advocacy, including the Americans for Safe Access Researcher of the Year Award 2021, the Cannabis Council of Canada Lifetime Achievement Award, and the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal.

Philippe Lucas

President, SABI Mind

Raad Seraj is a Bangladeshi-Canadian entrepreneur and founder of Mission Club, an angel investor network and education platform supporting startups addressing mental health using psychedelics. He also runs Minority Trip Report, a podcast showcasing underrepresented perspectives in psychedelics and mental health. During the day, he leads growth at Affinity, a San Francisco-based startup providing AI tools for private capital. Raad spent over a decade in climatetech and social impact. He founded one of the world’s first technology accelerators for water and created am immersive backpacking program that taught global sustainable fashion entrepreneurs about the fashion supply chain in Bangladesh. As an artist and advocate for underground culture, Raad founded Anda Residency, a non-profit that explored urban issues through immersive storytelling. He has a background in molecular biology and was once a host for MuchMusic (Canada’s MTV).

Founder, Mission Club

Rebecca Nicholson, a visionary entrepreneur, leads as the CEO and founding partner of 5D Ventures. With an unyielding commitment to impact investing, ethics, and an astute grasp of the ever-evolving landscape, she blends creativity and practicality to shape executive leadership and operational excellence. Drawing from over two decades of experience in managing high-level teams and transformative projects, Rebecca’s strategic prowess shines. From cultivating investor relationships to orchestrating dynamic company growth, her guidance steers 5D Ventures with grace and foresight. Her dedication extends to fostering a corporate culture founded on collaboration, innovation, and ethical impact. Rebecca’s adeptness in advocacy, orchestrating events and spearheading fundraising initiatives has propelled 5D Ventures to the industry forefront. Her influence extends beyond her role as a revered advisor in the immersive wellness and retreat space; she’s also a respected moderator and panelist who shapes revolutionary industry discourse. As a founding member of Celebrating Women in Psychedelics, she exemplifies commitment to both advancing her field and promoting diversity and opportunities for women.

Rebecca Nicholson

CEO & Founding Partner, 5D Ventures

Sam Chapman is the Executive Director for the Healing Advocacy Fund, a 501c3 non-profit organization, Healing Advocacy Fund works to implement safe, high quality, and affordable psychedelic therapy. HAF educates and supports leaders and communities in understanding the benefits of psychedelic therapy for mental health challenges including depression, anxiety and addiction. Over the course of his career, Sam has been an advocate for sensible drug policy, engaging youth in democracy and economic policies that leave no one behind. He has over a decade of experience in advocating for drug policy reforms at the local, state and national level, including championing psilocybin therapy as the campaign manager for Oregon’s Measure 109, which created the nation’s first state-regulated psilocybin therapy program. His previous experience includes consulting for numerous statewide political campaigns, assisting local governments in writing rules and regulations after the passage of drug policy reforms, advocating for equitable access to new healthcare treatment options, and identifying opportunities within emerging industries for social and economic good. For the last four years, Sam has been on the front lines of creating the foundation for safe, regulated and affordable access for psychedelic healing, and strives to continue to lead on drug policy reform efforts across the country. Originally from Maryland, Sam has been a resident of Oregon for 25 years. He holds a bachelor’s degree from the University of Oregon in Philosophy and Political Science.

Sam Chapman

Executive Director, Healing Advocacy Fund

Stefany is a seasoned entrepreneur who has built multiple international ventures with long-lasting social impact. Most recently, Stefany co-founded Gwella, a mushroom company building the most accessible and original over-the-counter portfolio of mushroom products that amplify individual and community wellness for today’s modern era. Previous to Gwella, Stefany founded Green Iglu, an award-winning food-sovereignty start-up that builds food production facilities in remote communities across Canada, including the Arctic. In her spare time, she leads the entrepreneurship programming for the Women’s Entrepreneurship Hub where she has the privilege of working with newcomers to Canada and low-income women to launch their business ideas.

Stefany Nieto

Founder, Gwella / Mojo Microdose

Tori Armbrust is the owner of Satori Farms PDX. She was the first in Oregon to receive a psilocybin manufacturing license under measure 109. Being a woman owned company operating with no partners, investors or employees has been a beautiful and challenging experience. She is a self-taught mushroom cultivator with nearly a decade of experience. Fungi cultivation and education is her passion and she is excited to share her story to inspire others to cultivate change and work towards their goals.

Tori Armbrust

Owner, Satori Farms PDX

Veronica Lightning Horse Perez, LLC, HGC, WWO, is a wife, mother of five, business owner, clergy member, author, speaker, co-chief proponent for the NMHA, Licensed Master Practitioner of NLP, teacher, healer, ceremonialist and most importantly an activist for psychedelic, indigenous, weteran and water rights. Having experienced years of suffering, she finally overcame a diagnosis of complex PTSD, a little over a decade ago. Since then she has made it her mission to help alleviate suffering in anyway, that she can and to remind others of how powerful they really are. She teaches to come from a place of strength instead of learned helplessness. She believes that only together can we heal the World and that all healing starts within the Self. When we heal the self, we heal the family, when we heal the family we heal the community, when we heal the community, we heal the world.

Veronica Lightning Horse Perez

Medicine Woman

Justin Botillier is CEO of Calyx CPA LLC in Southern Oregon. Justin has sixteen years of experience working with small business owners. Prior to its recreational legalization, he was among the first accounting professionals to advocate for the cannabis industry actively and publicly. In 2016, Justin sold his general practice to work in cannabis full-time. He now works with the psychedelic community to prepare business owners for the tax impact of 280E on businesses in the psilocybin industry. His firm specializes in business advisory, entity formation, tax preparation, and tax planning for plant medicine companies.

Justin Botillier

CEO, Calyx CPA LLC

Nicole Howell is one of California’s most effective and respected cannabis business and regulatory attorneys. Industry executives, private investors, and public companies turn to Nicole for her perspective and proven track record in advising the industry’s most successful operators through California’s challenging and dynamic market. She has been working against prohibitionist drug laws since the beginning of her career and is passionate about the cognitive, therapeutic, and spiritual healing that results from the perspective shift psychedelics provide. On the Founding Board of the The Psychedelic Bar Association, Nicole invites all who are interested to learn more.

Nicole Howell

Partner, Clark Howell LLP, Founding Board, Psychedelic Bar Association

Did you know that Psilocybin testing is a complex process that requires scientific expertise ? Testing for Psilocybin Potency is one of the most important tests in our psilocin panel and one of the most widely asked questions we encounter : How and Why? Dosage accuracy, Safety, and potential harm reduction, Standardization , and Quality control are just a few of the responsible components to our in depth recording and testing methodologies. In Oregon, Rose City Labs is the only licensed laboratory that can perform these tests. However, since there were no established industry standards or guidelines, the process was slow and challenging. The journey began two years ago with measure 109, and our team has dedicated hundreds of hours to developing reliable testing protocols by utilizing and creating testing standards to ensure compliance with the State’s regulatory requirements. Longtime counter-culture advocate and Lab owner, Dan Huson will share industry insights and steps toward laboratory regulations, potency and purity testing.

Daniel Huson

CEO, Rose City Laboratories

Rocco Iannapollo is a distinguished leader in the Natural Medicine Industry, bringing nearly three decades of experience in the Oil and Gas sector. His versatile background and global experience include roles in IT, Project Management, Procurement/Supply Chain, HR, Real Estate & Facilities, Transportation/Logistics, and Drug & Alcohol Testing, showcasing remarkable adaptability. In 2014, driven by his passion for natural medicine, Rocco transitioned from the corporate world. His consulting expertise led to his appointment as Chief Brand Officer at Boulder-based Cannabis Kitchen Supplies in 2017. He is also one of the founding members of The CannaConsortium, a coalition of ancillary companies devoted to driving client resilience and industry advancement. The merger of Cannabis Kitchen Supplies and 710 Spirits in 2023, forming 710Sci, underscores Rocco’s exceptional leadership and ability to drive shared vision and growth seamlessly. With over eight years in the dynamic Natural Medicine Industry, Rocco possesses profound insights and influential partnerships. His expertise extends to optimizing client supply chains, prioritizing sustainable practices for efficiency and cost-effectiveness, and advocating for sensible policy and guidelines. Rocco’s unwavering passion, diverse background, exceptional leadership, creativity, strategic partnerships, business acumen, commitment to sustainability, and deep insights position him as a visionary leader in the Natural Medicine industry.

Rocco Iannapollo

Chief Brand Officer, 710SCI

Julia Mande is a catalyzing facilitator for awareness-based systems change. She works with leaders to align strategy with values. Through Adapt to Complexity (A2C) she provides generative solutions to complex socio-environmental issues. Julia works with purpose-driven founders to launch and develop programs for meaningful social impact and has implemented programming in emerging sectors advancing soil health, plant medicine, conscious leadership, and decentralized management. Julia is a first-generation American, born in New York and raised in Zimbabwe, a daughter of emigrants from Morocco and the Jewish Diaspora.

Julia Mande

Facilitator & Co-Founder, A2C / Common Field

Sherry Rais, CEO and Co-Founder of Enthea , has helped dozens of startups, non-profit organizations, academic/research institutions, and small businesses raise funds, operate according to their mission and values, and implement processes that enhance their overall efficiency. Sherry believes in living and working in alignment with purpose and is currently focused on expanding access to psychedelic-assisted therapy to alleviate human suffering. Before this, Sherry consulted for over 10 years with the United Nations and World Bank, implementing cash transfer programs at the national level in over 35 countries. Sherry holds a master’s degree in public policy and administration from the London School of Economics and a bachelor’s degree in psychology and international development from McGill University. She also completed the Certificate in Psychedelic Therapies and Research from CIIS in 2021. In addition to being Enthea’s CEO, she is the Executive Director of the Boston Psychedelic Research Group and the Grants Manager for CIIS.

Sherry Rais

CEO/Co-Founder, Enthea

Ryan is co-founder of three separate entities operating within the Oregon legal psilocybin framework: Bendable Therapy, a 501c3 non-profit navigation service and access fund; Aboveground Services, a referral-based psilocybin service center focusing on mental health; and Drop Thesis, a manufacturing and multi-site service center business focused on personal wellness with novel product development and stylized brands. He is an Oregon licensed psilocybin facilitator and a licensed Professional Engineer with experience supporting start-ups navigate complex regulatory environments.

Co-Founder & Operations Advisor, Bendable Therapy

Growing up in the Mojave desert imparted upon Daniel with a keen sense of the stark beauty and inherent complexity of the natural world and cultivated a deep curiosity towards those elements hidden within its systems. Combining this love of the natural world with an educational background in Information Technology, Daniel works in research and development of novel compounds, delivery systems, and efficient extraction and testing methods within the psychedelics industry.

Daniel Riddle

Chief Technical Officer, Panacea Plant Sciences

Britt Rollins, Co-Founder of the National Psychedelics Association, brings a wealth of experience from the healthcare and pharmaceutical sectors. Having worked at renowned agencies like Saatchi & Saatchi, DDB, and Real Chemistry, Britt has been instrumental in guiding brands through pivotal moments, from launches to rebrands and FDA expansions. His tenure as Managing Director of Verdant Brand Communications saw him delve into emerging areas, notably women’s sexual health and adult-use cannabis, where he crafted narratives that resonated. Beyond the corporate world, Britt’s commitment to mental health advocacy is evident. His roles with the Educational Foundation of America and Veterans of War highlight a genuine drive to make a difference. Recognized by his peers and honored with industry awards, Britt’s approach combines deep knowledge with a knack for storytelling, making him a trusted strategist in marketing and healthcare. As the National Psychedelics Association gears up for its 2024 launch, Britt’s vision and expertise will undoubtedly play a key role in its trajectory.

Britt Rollins

Co-Founder/CEO, National Psychedelics Association

Frederica is a complexity enthusiast and an aficionado of transformational learning experiences. Fascinated by the ways that consciousness, worldviews and discourses change and expand, she has spent the past twenty years exploring the tools available to respond to civilizational crises, especially the modern West’s loss of the sacred. Frederica currently serves as Director of Psychedelic Practitioner Training at The Synthesis Institute. Prior to this, she served as Director of Education at Spiritual Directors International, designing professional development tools for advanced spiritual guides and companions. She recently appeared as a guest on the Waking the Wild and Tapped into Psychedelics podcasts, opining on training and certification of psychedelic practitioners. Frederica holds masters degrees from Yale Divinity School and the Yale School of the Environment, and a BA from Dartmouth College in Religion & Environmental studies. She has served as a Peace Corps volunteer, taught at the University of Washington and Seattle University, and worked as a global interfaith peacebuilder at the United Religions Initiative. She lives in Seattle with her husband and daughters.

Frederica Helmiere

Director of Psychedelic Practitioner Training, The Synthesis Institute

Erica Siegal, LCSW is a harm reduction advocate, psychedelic-assisted psychotherapist and community organizer. Erica has spent the past 20 years exploring diverse ways to create impactful, connective experiences while increasing community safety and wellness. She founded NEST Harm Reduction in 2019 to provide compassionate, trauma-informed services from individual psychotherapy to organizational consulting. She recently founded SHINE Collective, a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting survivors of psychedelic harm and abuse.

Erica Siegal

CEO & Founder, NEST Harm Reduction & Consulting

Chris Walden is an experienced professional with a demonstrated history of effectively raising awareness about the clinical use of ketamine at scale . His company, Ketamine Media, has represented nearly 300 clinics over the last seven years throughout North America.

Chris Walden

CEO, Ketamine Media

Thanks to our partners

COMMUNITY PARTNERS

MEDIA PARTNERS

Join our exclusive one day forum bringing together some of the brightest minds in the industry for thoughtful and informational conversation

Breakfast & Networking

Enjoy breakfast and mingle with other guests

Welcome to the Psychedelics Business Forum

A greeting from the reMind team

The New Psychedelics Era: Politics, Profit & Principles

What the business community needs to know about the opportunities — and responsibilities — that lie ahead

Changing Lives: The Promise of Psychedelics

Depression, PTSD, addiction, end-of-life treatments: A breakdown of individual drugs and their medical potential

How the Marketplace Will Evolve — Part 1

Policy changes, legal landscape, and recent election results

How the Marketplace Will Evolve — Part 2

Generational attitudes and habits are changing rapidly

Cannabis & Psychedelics: Similar Story, Different Trajectory

Understanding the booms, busts, and other risks and opportunities ahead

Amanda Reiman, PhD, is the Chief Knowledge Officer at New Frontier Data and the Founder of Personal Plants. Dr. Reiman is a social ethnobotanist and has been studying the relationship between cannabis, people and greater society for over 20 years. She is the Founder of Personal Plants, a platform designed to help people develop healthy, balanced relationships with psychoactive plants and the Chief Knowledge Officer for New Frontier Data, an analytics company serving the legal cannabis industry. Dr. Reiman earned her PhD in Social Welfare from the University of California and conducted one of the first research studies on medical cannabis patients and the use of cannabis as a substitute for alcohol and other drugs. She currently resides in Ukiah, CA with her partner Sean, their 3 cats and 2 dogs.

Named one of Fortune magazine’s 7 Most Powerful People in America’s Marijuana Industry, Ricardo Baca is a 25-year veteran journalist, Clio Awards juror, keynote speaker, two-time TEDx veteran, Marketer of the Year and drug policy futurist. He served as The Denver Post’s first-ever marijuana editor and founded news vertical The Cannabist, where he extensively covered the advent of adult-use cannabis and related issues across the country and around the world, as seen in the feature documentary Rolling Papers (Netflix). In 2016, Ricardo launched Grasslands: A Journalism-Minded Agency to work directly with business leaders in highly regulated industries, including cannabis and psychedelics. Named Marketer of the Year by AdCann in 2019 and 2021, Ricardo has received numerous accolades for his trailblazing work throughout the media paradigm, and continues to columnize for AdWeek, mg and other publications. Ricardo is considered to be the world’s first and "most prestigious" marijuana editor; one of Brookings Institution’s 12 Key People to Watch in Marijuana Policy; one of Time magazine’s 140 best Twitter feeds; one of Sensi magazine’s 24 Cannabis Pioneers Who Matter.

Lunch & Networking

Capitalism & consciousness: the evolution of business.

How psychedelics can co-exist with the profit motive and develop ethically with indigenous culture

Psychedelic Drug Discovery

Far more unknowns than knowns: Why our scientific explorations have only just begun

Investing in Psychedelics

How to evaluate the sectors, companies, and evolving landscape to identify opportunities

One Veteran’s Personal Journey

A combat veteran shares his experiences with psychedelics and PTSD

The Future of Psychedelics: Entrepreneurial Perspectives

Ideas and advice from entrepreneurs across the psychedelics industry

Zuber Lawler Cocktail Reception

Connect with the pioneers of the psychedelics industry.

reMind brings together innovative leaders in capital, policy, research, healthcare, culture, technology and education. Connect with leaders, newcomers, and investors in the rapidly growing psychedelics industry.

Get Involved

Expand your network: become a remind sponsor.

Interested in collaborating with reMind as a partner, advisor, presenter or sponsor? Complete the form below and a member of our team will be in touch.

About careers authorized service providers do not sell my personal information terms of use privacy policy.

Remember me Not recommended on shared computers

Forgot your password?

Public Health Forum

PhD / DrPh Fall 2022

By FuturePhDPls April 1, 2021 in Public Health Forum

Link to comment

Share on other sites.

Replies 1.2k
Created 3 yr
Last Reply 2 yr

NervousPotato

February 4, 2022

Guess they were quite thrilled to have me. I received an offer of admission today. Stats, FWIW: Undergrad GPA: 3.25, Masters GPA: 3.75 (WES assessment, though they looked at my actual trans

Posted Images

phdappfall2022

Yes, does anyone have insight on what program offer the best financial support for applicants who are accepted?

Thanks, FuturePhDpls , for getting us started.

I am popping myself into this thread to keep up the love and mutual support through this application process. I'm interested (so far) in the JHSPH, Harvard, BU, and GW programs. I'm sure I'll modify that list as time goes on especially with doubtlessly ensuing discussion.

Powerliftingnerd, I have the same question.

In addition, I want to know how important is/are:

1. BA GPA (as compared to MPH GPA and GRE scores and experience (claro))

2. experience post-graduation. I am just finishing my MPH now, but I worked in public health for over a decade.

Many thanks,

phdappfall2022 , KryzFerr and FuturePhDPls

3 weeks later...

Thanks for starting this year's thread!

I'm planning to apply to the JHU DrPH custom track. Taking the GRE in June ? . I feel like that stupid test has killed my confidence level!

Hello everyone! I am geographically confined to California (partner is also doing grad school in SoCal), so I am planning to apply to a few UC's (most likely San Diego, Irvine, LA) and possibly USC.

Sending positive vibes to everyone applying this cycle - WE GOT THIS!!!!

ScholarlyBaddie

So far, I'll apply to:

JHSPH Social Justice Track

We'll see what else I figure out about these programs. I'm more interested in a cohort model.

On 4/8/2021 at 7:53 PM, powerliftingnerd said: Yes, does anyone have insight on what program offer the best financial support for applicants who are accepted?

I don't have any insight into specific programs and their funding packages, but I do know they greatly vary from school to school. I recommend reaching out to admissions advisors of the schools you are interested in and asking about the typical funding offered to PhD students.

On 4/13/2021 at 5:42 PM, Mamitis said: Thanks, FuturePhDpls , for getting us started. I am popping myself into this thread to keep up the love and mutual support through this application process. I'm interested (so far) in the JHSPH, Harvard, BU, and GW programs. I'm sure I'll modify that list as time goes on especially with doubtlessly ensuing discussion. Powerliftingnerd, I have the same question. In addition, I want to know how important is/are: 1. BA GPA (as compared to MPH GPA and GRE scores and experience (claro)) 2. experience post-graduation. I am just finishing my MPH now, but I worked in public health for over a decade. Many thanks,

Hello! I'll try to help answer these questions based on what I've heard and picked up from looking at previous years' threads! Scores are more like gatekeepers and there is a much higher emphasis on grad GPA and GRE scores. They do look at BA GPA, but not has much as your grad GPA. Additionally, since PhD programs tend to have a more holistic admissions approach, I'm sure any relevant experience (especially public health experience) puts you in a great position since it shows you are dedicated to this field.

Hey all! I am new this this whole platform!

I was wondering how you all picked your choices and determining where you stand with others applying. I have two undergrad degrees (B.S. in Psych and B.A. in Human Development) and currently in my MPH program. I have some work history with government agencies (Will be three years upon getting my MPH). I really based my undergrad choice on financial restraints, and my MPH on how the values of the school lined up with mine. Obviously, a place like Harvard or John Hopkins stand out for prestige but is there value to smaller schools?

Many thanks!

hopeful2020PhD

On 2/26/2021 at 4:35 PM, FDawg said: Updating Tulane info: - Brown: 36K guaranteed for 5 years, TA required all semesters - BU: 36k guaranteed for 4 years, no TA required - Columbia (Mailman): 35k guaranteed for 5 years, TA required for 1 semester - Emory: >30k stipend for an unknown duration, (TA requirements unknown) - Harvard: 36k guaranteed for 4 years, TA required for 1 semester ( @hopeful2020PhD please correct me) - JHU (Hopkins): just tuition guaranteed~24k stipend for 4 years but NOT guaranteed, (TA requirements unknown) - NYU: 25k??? for 5 years but only for 9 months/year, no TA required ( @teabunny do you or anyone else remember the exact amount from the NYU interview day?) - Penn State Uni: 31k for an unknown duration, (TA requirements unknown) - Tulane: 28k for 4 years through RA-ing with advisor, no TA required, tuition, health insurance, fees guaranteed for 4 years - UCSF: ~40k guaranteed for 4 years, (TA requirements unknown) - U Minnesota: 24-25k for unknown duration, (TA requirements unknown) - U Penn: 34k stipend for an unknown duration, (TA requirements unknown) - Yale: 38k guaranteed for 5 years, TA required for 2 semesters

In regards to:

On 4/8/2021 at 10:53 PM, powerliftingnerd said: Yes, does anyone have insight on what program offer the best financial support for applicants who are accepted?

phdappfall2022 , FuturePhDPls and DrPHForce

On 5/11/2021 at 11:36 PM, Chihuahua said: Hey all! I am new this this whole platform! I was wondering how you all picked your choices and determining where you stand with others applying. I have two undergrad degrees (B.S. in Psych and B.A. in Human Development) and currently in my MPH program. I have some work history with government agencies (Will be three years upon getting my MPH). I really based my undergrad choice on financial restraints, and my MPH on how the values of the school lined up with mine. Obviously, a place like Harvard or John Hopkins stand out for prestige but is there value to smaller schools? Many thanks!

Hey, Chichuahua!

Are you looking at PhD programs or DrPH programs?

I don't know much about PhD programs, but I do know a bit about DrPH programs. I think the value and values depend on what you are looking for. Many DrPH programs are pretty similar to PhD programs. Is that what you are looking for? Harvard, for example, is not like a PhD program and neither is Johns Hopkins. They are both focused more on leadership and scholarship than research. Harvard has a cohort of 8-10 students, so it's based on forming a tight knit community with a collectivist learning model. Hopkins creates small concentration cohorts, but the program is remote, so the relationship development is largely online.

It's been ten years since I have been in grad school. I just found out that John Hopkins offered a part time DRPH program! While checking the requirements, I noticed it said that the GRE is not required. Should I still take the GREs or take my chances and apply without it? Any opinions?

image.png.e075ec7344c0b0376b223a3be2c8e7e8.png

On 5/14/2021 at 8:31 AM, Mamitis said: Hey, Chichuahua! Are you looking at PhD programs or DrPH programs? I don't know much about PhD programs, but I do know a bit about DrPH programs. I think the value and values depend on what you are looking for. Many DrPH programs are pretty similar to PhD programs. Is that what you are looking for? Harvard, for example, is not like a PhD program and neither is Johns Hopkins. They are both focused more on leadership and scholarship than research. Harvard has a cohort of 8-10 students, so it's based on forming a tight knit community with a collectivist learning model. Hopkins creates small concentration cohorts, but the program is remote, so the relationship development is largely online.

Hey Mamitis!

I am looking at DrPH programs. I have been looking mainly at online programs that have concentrations within health policy and online, since I plan to work full time while in school. When comparing schools I think I struggle with determining how to prioritize schools. It seems like most people on Gradcafe apply for John Hopkins but Penn State also has a strong program with the same general structure. Is there something about Harvard and John Hopkins, besides name recognition, that really draws people there?

5 minutes ago, Chihuahua said: Hey Mamitis! I am looking at DrPH programs. I have been looking mainly at online programs that have concentrations within health policy and online, since I plan to work full time while in school. When comparing schools I think I struggle with determining how to prioritize schools. It seems like most people on Gradcafe apply for John Hopkins but Penn State also has a strong program with the same general structure. Is there something about Harvard and John Hopkins, besides name recognition, that really draws people there?

Hey! Awesome!

I think the faculty component can be important. I have a friend who is doing her DrPH at Hopkins, and she has a (literally) world class faculty that she benefits from. I am certainly not saying other schools lack that component, but Hopkins definitely has it. As for Harvard, I think the same is true. I just spoke with a recent grad, and he was pretty stoked about his experience there. Lots of personalized attention. Not sure that helps.

Just now, Mamitis said: Hey! Awesome! I think the faculty component can be important. I have a friend who is doing her DrPH at Hopkins, and she has a (literally) world class faculty that she benefits from. I am certainly not saying other schools lack that component, but Hopkins definitely has it. As for Harvard, I think the same is true. I just spoke with a recent grad, and he was pretty stoked about his experience there. Lots of personalized attention. Not sure that helps.

Does anyone have any advice or insight into the application process. I'm trying to map out a timeline of what I need to do in the next couple of months. So far, I've reached out to professors for letters of rec, but not sure what else I need to do in the mean time...

On 5/14/2021 at 7:41 PM, mouake said: It's been ten years since I have been in grad school. I just found out that John Hopkins offered a part time DRPH program! While checking the requirements, I noticed it said that the GRE is not required. Should I still take the GREs or take my chances and apply without it? Any opinions?

Thank you for posting! I literally checked like a month ago and it still said it was required. I'm not sure if I should do a happy dance or have a meltdown because I've wasted all my free time studying for the past 3 months. ?

Since I've already scheduled and studied I'm going to go through with it, but there's definitely a huge weight off.

On 5/16/2021 at 9:44 PM, Chihuahua said: Hey Mamitis! I am looking at DrPH programs. I have been looking mainly at online programs that have concentrations within health policy and online, since I plan to work full time while in school. When comparing schools I think I struggle with determining how to prioritize schools. It seems like most people on Gradcafe apply for John Hopkins but Penn State also has a strong program with the same general structure. Is there something about Harvard and John Hopkins, besides name recognition, that really draws people there?

This is what I'm trying to do as well. Columbia has an program that I'm also interested in, but it requires the first year to be in-person. So for me Hopkins is less about the prestige of the school and more about the process of elimination.

On 5/18/2021 at 5:40 PM, FuturePhDPls said: Does anyone have any advice or insight into the application process. I'm trying to map out a timeline of what I need to do in the next couple of months. So far, I've reached out to professors for letters of rec, but not sure what else I need to do in the mean time...

I didn't think about reaching out so early, I thought we had to wait until the platform opened. Should I plan on doing it sooner??

I've love to hear if any DrPH applicants are planning to reach out to professors whose work you are interested in. I know that's recommended for PhDs, but I'm not sure if it would be helpful for a DrPH application.

Hi All! I am also new to this platform. Actually, my friends had just recommended I share and discuss info with other applicants here. I am applying to Epidemiology (pharmacoepidemiology) Ph.D. program in 2022 Fall. If anyone is about to do the same thing, please feel free to contact me. Thanks ALL!

Global Ambassador , Galpal and Nguyen.Truong
1 month later...

Nguyen.Truong

I am also finding pharmacoepidemiology Ph.D. program. What programs did you consider?

Global Ambassador
4 weeks later...

I just started my MPH at UIC SPH in Public Health Informatics. I already have an MBA from '97 and now over 25+ years of experience. I hope to pursue my DrPH from one of the following schools. I plan to work full time and pursue the DrPH PT remotely, hence the following programs which offer either fully remote or mostly remote programs. Any thoughts? Thanks!

GA Southern CPH
Mercer Dept PH
U of Nebraska CPH
UNC Gillings SGPH

Mr. Jameson

I am wondering if anyone is planning on applying to health policy or health services research PhDs? I am currently planning on applying to the following programs.

image.png.d153447127d7e118b17287f270a9d119.png

I am not sure what the background of typical applicants to these programs look like-- I have a B.A. in economics/mathematics and finishing my M.S. in computer science and public policy. I have been working as an RA at the intersection of social science/health for a while so I am hoping that is enough to establish my credibility in my applications.

FuturePhDPls and HLC

On 5/12/2021 at 4:39 PM, hopeful2020PhD said: In regards to:

Thanks @hopeful2020PhD . Are these for PhD programs only or for DrPH as well ?

On 5/26/2021 at 2:22 PM, Billowack said: This is what I'm trying to do as well. Columbia has an program that I'm also interested in, but it requires the first year to be in-person. So for me Hopkins is less about the prestige of the school and more about the process of elimination. I didn't think about reaching out so early, I thought we had to wait until the platform opened. Should I plan on doing it sooner?? I've love to hear if any DrPH applicants are planning to reach out to professors whose work you are interested in. I know that's recommended for PhDs, but I'm not sure if it would be helpful for a DrPH application.

I am applying for DrPH programs and have reached out to a handful of faculty. Most that replied thought I was a good fit for their program and were willing to be my collaborators/supervisors/ advisors. However, none of them have brought up funding or even asked how I was planning to fund my study. I on the other hand am having difficulty bringing this up with them. Its sort of an African thing ??‍♂️ Any advice on how to approach this without sounding too desperate or obtrusive ?

Also, I was wondering how much traction with the admissions committee a prospective student gains by communicating with a potential advisor. Anyone please ?

On 7/26/2021 at 3:18 PM, Mr. Jameson said: Hello all, I am wondering if anyone is planning on applying to health policy or health services research PhDs? I am currently planning on applying to the following programs. I am not sure what the background of typical applicants to these programs look like-- I have a B.A. in economics/mathematics and finishing my M.S. in computer science and public policy. I have been working as an RA at the intersection of social science/health for a while so I am hoping that is enough to establish my credibility in my applications.

I'm also applying health policy/HSR - average applicant is probably a tough thing to pin down, as lot of entry points make sense for health policy (e.g. health dept/government experience, econ, public policy/poli sci, public health). I think it's incredibly dependent on how you frame yourself in fit, in addition to whatever accomplishments/references you bring to the table. From my conversations with folks who actually make the decisions where I went to school (top 20 SPH), people on here really underestimate the role of fit and the faculty who will/won't champion your application in internal deliberations. Experiences really don't matter unless you can coherently speak to someone discussing why they matter.

HLC and DrPHForce

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Existing user? Sign In
Online Users
All Activity
My Activity Streams
Unread Content
Content I Started
Results Search
Post Results
Leaderboard
Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use

IMAGES

EDHEC PhD IN FINANCE FORUM 2022'S DETAILED AGENDA IS NOW AVAILABLE
2022 Edition
DATE 2022 PhD Forum Best Poster Prize
Join us for PhD research forum 2022
PhD Support Program 2022
PhD Day 2022

VIDEO

[LIVE]
Get your PhD while doing a Job!
Daniel Schuval, Bar Ilan University, Office of International Relations. PhD Forum, 20 may 2024
#LeCrashTest, Episode 8 : PhDTalent
ESUT 35TH INAUGURAL LECTURE
Worker Valuation of Retirement Benefits

COMMENTS

Fall 2022 Business Ph.D. Applicants
24. Program:Ph.D. Organizational Behavior. Posted September 29, 2021 (edited) Hey everyone! Hard to believe nearly a year has past since the last Ph.D. application thread got started. For those who are going to be applying in the current cycle (enrollment Fall 2022), please feel free to follow along and contribute to this thread.
Fall 2022 Business Ph.D. Applicants
Specifically interested in the application of machine learning and textual analysis. Applying to 20-25 programs this year, including top schools and some "safer" options. Haven't yet finished all and have been quite swamped. Dream schools are MIT, Harvard, UPenn, Columbia, etc.
Fall 2022 Business Ph.D. Applicants
Business School Forum ; Fall 2022 Business Ph.D. Applicants Fall 2022 Business Ph.D. Applicants. ph.d. business; marketing; finance; management; ... PhD-hopeful. January 22, 2022. Hey everyone - first year management student here. I wanted to wish you all good luck with interviews!
Fall 2022 PhD start
Note from Forum Admin ----- Welcome to the 2022 Ph.D. in business concentrations' sweat thread! This is a thread for applicants (hopefully!) starting their PhD program in 2022! Use this is vent, discuss any frustrations, or random musings that you would like others to weigh in on! Best of luck to this years applicants!
Forums
Fall 2022 PhD start - PhD Applicant Sweat Thread 1 2. By tm_associate, ... New forum software! Biggest change in years! By Erin, October 21, 2021 in Announcements. 1 reply; 15.6k ... PhD in Business 4.3k; Admissions Results 1.8k; Graduate Admissions 6.6k;
The GradCafe
Search up-to-date admission results to more than 250 graduate schools. With over 840,000 admission results submitted, TheGradCafe helps millions of grad students each year with their admissions journey. Search. See what's brewing. The Best Academic Planners for 2024/2025. ... Forum. Write For Us.
Admission to the PhD Program
Knight-Hennessy Scholars admits up to 100 select applicants each year from across Stanford's seven graduate schools, and delivers engaging experiences that prepare them to be visionary, courageous, and collaborative leaders ready to address complex global challenges. As a scholar, you join a distinguished cohort, participate in up to three years of leadership programming, and receive full ...
EDHEC PhD IN FINANCE FORUM 2022'S DETAILED ...
27 Apr 2022. The fifth EDHEC PhD IN FINANCE FORUM will be held online on 7 June 2022. Discover the detailed agenda and join us ! Five of our PhD candidates and graduates will present their research to an international audience of academics and finance practitioners. We are extremely grateful to Professor Sydney Ludvigson, the Silver Professor ...
PhD in Business program
At the same time, most programs take only about 10-20 PhD students so it is more competitive but it is more theoretical. Your best shot at improving your chances is getting a high GMAT or GRE score to show your commitment. That should be doable in the next few months. B. dungltp9.
2022 Sweat Thread
February 10, 2022. Thanks everyone for your support. Best of luck to you guys. The most frustrating thing about applying from a developing country is the fact that there is nothing you can do to improve your pr. March 4, 2022. This cycle is harder than I expected.
Executive Forum Speaker Series: Fall 2022
August 30, 2022 @ 6:30pm. Jordan Zimmerman is Founder, Chairman and architect of the Zimmerman Advertising Empire, one of the top 10 largest advertising agencies in the world with published billings in excess of $4 billion. Jordan founded his company in 1984 working tirelessly, personifying an insane commitment to be the best.
Fall 2022 Business Ph.D. Applicants
PhD22Plz. Members. 24. Program:Ph.D. Organizational Behavior. Author. Posted November 21, 2021. As of this morning, I have submitted 10 of 16 applications. Feeling very good about where I am at, although the reality is setting in about the waiting game ahead. Hopefully these next few months go by quick!
2024 Best Business Schools (MBA)
See expanded profiles for more than 2,000 programs. Unlock entering class stats including MCAT, GMAT and GRE scores for business, medicine, engineering, education and nursing programs ...
Executive Forum Speaker Series: Spring 2022
Chief Executive Officer, Artemis Synergies ConsultingAdjunct Professor, Florida Atlantic University, College of Business. January 15, 2022 @ 1:15pmMarch 16, 2022 @ 6:30pmApril 30, 2022 @ 2:45pm. Mr. Rudy Molinet earned his Master of Public Health in Healthcare Administration with honors from Columbia University and his Bachelor of Science in ...
***2022-2023 MD/PhD Interview Invites***
In-person MD/PhD interview, virtual MD. ****. DO NOT ERASE THESE INSTRUCTIONS! 1) Click quote on the most recent list. 2) Delete the quote tags on the top and bottom. 3) Add your user name, (complete date, interview invite date, interview date, any other pertinent info, and if needed, add the school name to the list.
SenSys 2022 PhD Forum
The SenSys/BuildSys 2022 Joint PhD Forum (Doctoral Colloquium) seeks to provide a friendly, supportive, and constructive environment for doctoral students to explore and develop their research interests in an interdisciplinary workshop, under the guidance of a panel of distinguished researchers. The forum provides an excellent opportunity for Ph.D. students to present their dissertation ...
2021-2022 MD/PhD cycle
Please note that overall, we had a 15% increase in the number of applications as compared to 2020. We just reviewed the overall total number of acceptances and they were quite similar between both years, however, the 2021 class will be greater as there were more applicants with at least one MD/PhD acceptance. 1 user.
Business School Forum
Thegradcafe's Business school forum covers many different topics. See others admission results or acceptance rates, Marketing PhD questions or share your advice with other students! ... By olliesun, March 26, 2022 phd; finance (and 1 more) Tagged with: phd; finance; business school; 0 replies; 8.7k views; olliesun; March 26, 2022; 2021 Business ...
10 In-Demand Jobs You Can Get with a Business Degree (2024)
Of all bachelor's degrees conferred in the 2018-19 academic year, the greatest number were conferred in business [].You can apply the skills you develop while earning a business degree in many industries. Whether you're just graduating or looking to pivot to a new career in business, consider these quickly growing (and high-paying) jobs you can apply for with a business degree.
Profile Results 2022
31. Posted April 21, 2022 (edited) Type of Undergrad: one Bachelor in Economics and one in Business Administration at one of the best European Business Schools. Undergrad GPA (Economics): 4.0 equivalent (Top 5% of Cohort) Type of Grad: 2 Year Master in Economics at a Top 10 European Economics Department.
PhD Forum
PhD Forum Book of Abstracts is available at the link! * * * Submission deadline extended to September 9, 2022 * * * About the PhD Forum The PhD Forum provides an opportunity for doctoral students to present their work (related to the SoftCOM 2022 conference topics) to a wider community of researchers from academia and industry. Its aim is also to encourage interaction and networking among ...
Trends in Ransomware Attacks on US Hospitals, Clinics, and Other Health
JAMA Health Forum. 2022;3(12):e224873. doi:10.1001 ... Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-covered entities and their business associates need not report it if they can demonstrate a low probability that PHI has ... Hannah T. Neprash, PhD, Division of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health ...
Fall 2024 Business PhD applicants
Harvard- OB. George Washington- Org Psych. University of Connecticut- Business Management and Org Psychology (2 programs) Montclair State University- Org Psych. CUNY- Org Psych. Fordham- Business Management. Some background: Master's degree from Columbia University in Organizational Psychology. GPA (graduate): 3.93.
2022 Business Forum
In 2016, Justin sold his general practice to work in cannabis full-time. He now works with the psychedelic community to prepare business owners for the tax impact of 280E on businesses in the psilocybin industry. His firm specializes in business advisory, entity formation, tax preparation, and tax planning for plant medicine companies.
Assistant Coach, Baseball in Belton, TX for University of Mary Hardin
Assistant Coach, Baseball ID: 1894 Department: Athletics Type: Full-time Staff Post Date: 06/19/2024 Position Available Date: 06/26/2024 Description Responsibilities: Assists in the design, implementation and evaluation of the baseball program.Performs all related administrative duties as assigned, to include recruiting, travel, resource management and media communications.
PhD / DrPh Fall 2022
1. BA GPA (as compared to MPH GPA and GRE scores and experience (claro)) 2. experience post-graduation. I am just finishing my MPH now, but I worked in public health for over a decade. Many thanks, KryzFerr, FuturePhDPls and phdappfall2022. 3. 3 weeks later...

Search Grad School Admissions

TheGradCafe.com

Grad School Admission Search

See what's brewing

2024 Most popular PhD Programs

About Stanford GSB

About the Experience

Full-Time Degree Programs

Non-Degree & Certificate Programs

Faculty Research

Research Hub

Research Labs

Research Initiatives

Welcome, Alumni

Admission Events & Information Sessions

Admission to the PhD Program

1. Get to Know Us

2. Apply to Our Program

See What’s Required for Your Application

Safety, Security, and Fire Report

Privacy & Non-Discrimination

EDHEC PhD IN FINANCE FORUM 2022'S DETAILED AGENDA IS NOW AVAILABLE

Other articles you may be interested in

PhD in Business program - USA

SenSys 2022 PhD Forum

HotCRP.com signin

Submissions

*** 2021-2022 MD/PhD cycle - Questions, Comments, and other things ***

MSTP Director

MSTPadvocate

chemicallycozy

M2 MD/PhD, In Clerkships

applicant20212022

Peritus_Medicus

I like libraries

deleted1108964

MDPhDHopeful3985

MD/PhD Applicant

mitochondriaa

Similar threads

Profile Results 2022

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

proletariat

econmasterabc

kingwilling

quantitypham

Latino_in_Economics

SwissEconomist

Sweaty, need a shower

Join the conversation

About the PhD Forum

Instructions for PhD Forum authors

Conference begins in

See More About

Others Also Liked

Manage citations:

Trends in Ransomware Attacks on US Hospitals, Clinics, and Other Health Care Delivery Organizations, 2016-2021

! SAVE THE DATE !

The Psychedelics Business Forum

NOVEMBER 15th, 2022

Passes start at $349

Featured Speakers

Bethany Gomez

Amanda Reiman

Ricardo Baca

Chris Claussen

Ariel Clark

Scarlet Masius

Sean McAllister

Courtney Barnes

Deidra Somerville

Graham Pechenik

Josh Hardman

Katherine MacLean

Nykol Bailey Rice

Paul F. Austin

Philippe Lucas

Rebecca Nicholson

Sam Chapman

* 2021-2022 MD/PhD cycle - Questions, Comments, and other things *