Get Into Med School
ASO Keyword Dashboard
Tracking 104 keywords for Get Into Med School in Google Play
Get Into Med School tracks 104 keywords (no keywords rank yet; 104 need traction). Key metrics: opportunity 70.8, difficulty 43.2.
Get Into Med School is a simple calculator app
Tracked keywords
104
0 ranked • 104 not ranking yet
Top 10 coverage
—
Best rank — • Latest leader —
Avg opportunity
70.8
Top keyword: contain
Avg difficulty
43.2
Lower scores indicate easier wins
Opportunity leaders
- 64.8
contain
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 48.6 • Rank —
Competitors: 583
- 60.2
scoring
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 38.3 • Rank —
Competitors: 261
- 65.7
rating
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 47.8 • Rank —
Competitors: 608
- 64.0
schools
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 38.8 • Rank —
Competitors: 145
- 65.8
determine
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 41.3 • Rank —
Competitors: 577
Unranked opportunities
contain
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 48.6 • Competitors: 583
scoring
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 38.3 • Competitors: 261
rating
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 47.8 • Competitors: 608
schools
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 38.8 • Competitors: 145
determine
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 41.3 • Competitors: 577
High competition keywords
easy
Total apps: 331,281 • Major competitors: 16,423
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 56.5
make
Total apps: 330,586 • Major competitors: 20,510
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 57.9
simple
Total apps: 249,726 • Major competitors: 12,059
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 55.1
using
Total apps: 224,667 • Major competitors: 12,360
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 57.0
way
Total apps: 203,300 • Major competitors: 11,331
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 55.5
All tracked keywords
Includes opportunity, difficulty, rankings and competitor benchmarks
| Major Competitors | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| level | 68 | 100 | 54 | 80 104,955 competing apps Median installs: 2,535 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 6,877 major competitor apps |
| competitive | 72 | 100 | 46 | 70 24,069 competing apps Median installs: 1,320 Avg rating: 2.3 | — | — | 1,195 major competitor apps |
| single | 69 | 100 | 51 | 78 73,270 competing apps Median installs: 2,368 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 4,213 major competitor apps |
| order | 67 | 100 | 52 | 82 140,112 competing apps Median installs: 557 Avg rating: 2.3 | — | — | 4,296 major competitor apps |
| easy | 65 | 100 | 56 | 88 331,281 competing apps Median installs: 2,450 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 16,423 major competitor apps |
| make | 65 | 100 | 58 | 88 330,586 competing apps Median installs: 2,478 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 20,510 major competitor apps |
| whether | 66 | 100 | 53 | 84 195,157 competing apps Median installs: 953 Avg rating: 2.3 | — | — | 7,857 major competitor apps |
| medical | 71 | 100 | 44 | 72 33,255 competing apps Median installs: 1,248 Avg rating: 2.1 | — | — | 882 major competitor apps |
| used | 68 | 100 | 55 | 81 117,242 competing apps Median installs: 3,096 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 5,234 major competitor apps |
| profile | 71 | 100 | 51 | 73 38,221 competing apps Median installs: 1,033 Avg rating: 2.3 | — | — | 1,730 major competitor apps |
| created | 70 | 100 | 48 | 76 56,431 competing apps Median installs: 1,948 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 2,203 major competitor apps |
| list | 69 | 100 | 52 | 78 81,768 competing apps Median installs: 2,565 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 3,557 major competitor apps |
| way | 66 | 100 | 56 | 85 203,300 competing apps Median installs: 1,967 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 11,331 major competitor apps |
| using | 66 | 100 | 57 | 85 224,667 competing apps Median installs: 2,837 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 12,360 major competitor apps |
| account | 68 | 100 | 54 | 79 92,466 competing apps Median installs: 2,093 Avg rating: 2.6 | — | — | 4,915 major competitor apps |
| score | 71 | 100 | 48 | 74 41,369 competing apps Median installs: 1,563 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 2,016 major competitor apps |
| small | 70 | 100 | 49 | 76 56,434 competing apps Median installs: 2,176 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 2,887 major competitor apps |
| helping | 71 | 100 | 45 | 73 36,548 competing apps Median installs: 984 Avg rating: 2.3 | — | — | 1,240 major competitor apps |
| accurate | 70 | 100 | 48 | 75 50,895 competing apps Median installs: 1,434 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 2,486 major competitor apps |
| create | 66 | 100 | 60 | 84 197,691 competing apps Median installs: 3,071 Avg rating: 2.6 | — | — | 14,326 major competitor apps |
| simple | 66 | 100 | 55 | 86 249,726 competing apps Median installs: 2,085 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 12,059 major competitor apps |
| contain | 74 | 100 | 49 | 65 11,637 competing apps Median installs: 4,880 Avg rating: 2.4 | — | — | 583 major competitor apps |
| apply | 70 | 100 | 50 | 74 43,531 competing apps Median installs: 6,270 Avg rating: 2.7 | — | — | 3,233 major competitor apps |
| become | 68 | 100 | 54 | 80 103,841 competing apps Median installs: 5,321 Avg rating: 2.6 | — | — | 9,771 major competitor apps |
| much | 68 | 100 | 52 | 81 113,033 competing apps Median installs: 1,776 Avg rating: 2.5 | — | — | 5,873 major competitor apps |
App Description
Get Into Med School is a simple calculator app
This system was originally created as a supplement to, not a replacement for, the already widely-utilized LizzyM scoring system. As a reference, the LizzyM score is defined as (GPA*10)+MCAT and may contain a +1 or -1 modifier in certain situations. The applicant's LizzyM score is then compared to the LizzyM score for a school to determine whether or not the applicant is statistically competitive for that school. However, the inherent simplicity of the LizzyM score, while making it quick and easy to generate and apply, also creates problems endemic to systems that reduce and generalize. The two major simplifications are the reduction of an entire application to two (already numerical) metrics and the assumption that the LizzyM score accounts for the majority of, if not all of, the variability attributed to selectivity.
While there is merit to these assumptions, which is why the LizzyM score is so widely used, there are also deficiencies that need to be addressed in order to create a more accurate system for assessing an application. One of these deficiencies is that certain schools with similar LizzyM schools may be in very different levels of competitiveness. For example, although UVA and Duke have identical LizzyM scores, it is clear that Duke is a much more selective school than UVA. Additionally, small differences in LizzyM score become significant when using this metric to assess competitiveness for two similar schools. For example, Duke has a LizzyM score of 75, while Yale has a LizzyM score of 76; both schools are similarly selective, but someone might (very mistakenly) advise a applicant with a 3.9/36 that they are more competitive for Duke than they are for Yale. Finally, the LizzyM score is used as a way to tell if someone is statistically competitive for a single school and is significantly less useful for helping an applicant come up with a list of schools.
The Applicant Rating System - Overview
The WedgeDawg Applicant Rating System (ARS) was created to address these deficiencies. It takes into account most of the factors that make up an application to medical school, gives an applicant a separate score for each one, and then gives an applicant a numerical rating. This numerical rating is then translated to a category level and a profile of schools to apply to is created based on that category.
King of the Curve do
