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 44.0.
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
44.0
Lower scores indicate easier wins
Opportunity leaders
- 64.7
contain
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 51.8 • Rank —
Competitors: 506
- 60.4
scoring
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 38.6 • Rank —
Competitors: 243
- 65.7
rating
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 50.3 • Rank —
Competitors: 589
- 64.0
schools
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 38.9 • Rank —
Competitors: 138
- 65.7
determine
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 41.5 • Rank —
Competitors: 512
Unranked opportunities
contain
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 51.8 • Competitors: 506
scoring
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 38.6 • Competitors: 243
rating
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 50.3 • Competitors: 589
schools
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 38.9 • Competitors: 138
determine
Opportunity: 74.0 • Difficulty: 41.5 • Competitors: 512
High competition keywords
easy
Total apps: 327,701 • Major competitors: 14,519
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 57.3
make
Total apps: 327,341 • Major competitors: 18,223
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 58.8
simple
Total apps: 256,476 • Major competitors: 11,035
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 55.8
using
Total apps: 221,966 • Major competitors: 10,965
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 57.9
way
Total apps: 206,164 • Major competitors: 10,421
Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 56.5
All tracked keywords
Includes opportunity, difficulty, rankings and competitor benchmarks
| Major Competitors | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| level | 68 | 100 | 55 | 80 109,650 competing apps Median installs: 1,859 Avg rating: 2.1 | — | — | 6,423 major competitor apps |
| competitive | 72 | 100 | 47 | 70 24,602 competing apps Median installs: 1,196 Avg rating: 1.9 | — | — | 1,146 major competitor apps |
| single | 69 | 100 | 52 | 78 75,078 competing apps Median installs: 1,819 Avg rating: 2.0 | — | — | 3,979 major competitor apps |
| order | 67 | 100 | 52 | 82 142,080 competing apps Median installs: 480 Avg rating: 1.8 | — | — | 4,028 major competitor apps |
| easy | 65 | 100 | 57 | 88 327,701 competing apps Median installs: 1,985 Avg rating: 2.0 | — | — | 14,519 major competitor apps |
| make | 65 | 100 | 59 | 88 327,341 competing apps Median installs: 2,047 Avg rating: 2.1 | — | — | 18,223 major competitor apps |
| whether | 66 | 100 | 54 | 84 192,632 competing apps Median installs: 882 Avg rating: 1.9 | — | — | 6,833 major competitor apps |
| medical | 71 | 100 | 44 | 72 33,909 competing apps Median installs: 1,039 Avg rating: 1.9 | — | — | 840 major competitor apps |
| used | 68 | 100 | 55 | 81 116,194 competing apps Median installs: 2,383 Avg rating: 2.0 | — | — | 4,649 major competitor apps |
| profile | 71 | 100 | 52 | 73 38,936 competing apps Median installs: 872 Avg rating: 1.9 | — | — | 1,600 major competitor apps |
| created | 70 | 100 | 48 | 76 55,816 competing apps Median installs: 1,592 Avg rating: 2.0 | — | — | 1,989 major competitor apps |
| list | 69 | 100 | 53 | 78 82,573 competing apps Median installs: 1,952 Avg rating: 2.0 | — | — | 3,303 major competitor apps |
| way | 66 | 100 | 57 | 85 206,164 competing apps Median installs: 1,630 Avg rating: 2.1 | — | — | 10,421 major competitor apps |
| using | 66 | 100 | 58 | 85 221,966 competing apps Median installs: 2,289 Avg rating: 2.0 | — | — | 10,965 major competitor apps |
| account | 68 | 100 | 55 | 79 93,969 competing apps Median installs: 1,719 Avg rating: 2.1 | — | — | 4,674 major competitor apps |
| score | 71 | 100 | 49 | 74 42,475 competing apps Median installs: 1,452 Avg rating: 1.9 | — | — | 1,898 major competitor apps |
| small | 70 | 100 | 50 | 76 57,588 competing apps Median installs: 1,656 Avg rating: 2.0 | — | — | 2,714 major competitor apps |
| helping | 71 | 100 | 45 | 73 36,051 competing apps Median installs: 878 Avg rating: 1.9 | — | — | 1,110 major competitor apps |
| accurate | 70 | 100 | 48 | 75 55,009 competing apps Median installs: 876 Avg rating: 1.9 | — | — | 2,278 major competitor apps |
| create | 66 | 100 | 62 | 84 201,739 competing apps Median installs: 2,495 Avg rating: 2.1 | — | — | 13,289 major competitor apps |
| simple | 66 | 100 | 56 | 86 256,476 competing apps Median installs: 1,672 Avg rating: 1.9 | — | — | 11,035 major competitor apps |
| contain | 74 | 100 | 52 | 65 11,555 competing apps Median installs: 3,664 Avg rating: 2.1 | — | — | 506 major competitor apps |
| apply | 70 | 100 | 52 | 74 44,079 competing apps Median installs: 4,455 Avg rating: 2.2 | — | — | 2,984 major competitor apps |
| become | 68 | 100 | 55 | 80 102,830 competing apps Median installs: 4,648 Avg rating: 2.2 | — | — | 8,739 major competitor apps |
| much | 68 | 100 | 52 | 80 111,742 competing apps Median installs: 1,459 Avg rating: 2.0 | — | — | 5,278 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
