djgoldma

University of British Columbia: Dr. Carlo Marra - Tier 1 Canada research chair, PhD UBC focuses on health econ, specifically outcomes, and CEA analysis University of Toronto: Dr. Paul Grootendorst - PhD Toronto focuses on reimbursement and insurance Now, Dr. Marra is doing the exact type of work I want to do, but he is not an economist. Dr G. is an economist, so his work in health econ is a little more advanced, and he is willing to let me do CEA and outcomes work, which is out of his area. I know there are ppl on this board that spent a lot of time researching supervisors to help with their decisions. I was wondering if people can perhaps use their resourcefullness and tell me what they think of these 2 supervisors. Based on my research, Marra takes the cake...looking for your opinions.. Thanks.

I thought about the econ MA, but no, it's 2 yrs in Canada...if it were 1 yr, I'd do it. The PhD is 4 yrs, so, if I am going back to school for pharma econ, it would be for a PhD. My point is - despite the fact that not many have a PhD for what I wanna do, things may change in 10 yrs, and I never want to be rejected from a potential positon, because another applicant had a PhD. How can it really hurt me? The PhD will further develop my research skills, give me hands on experience with modeling, and CEA/COI studies, not to mention the plethora of other skills that a degree at this level offers. Opportunity cost of doing it...4 yrs of making $85,000 to 4 years of making $12,000. But I think the long term income potential with a PhD is greater..?

Hey, I posted questions regarding which school to choose for a PhD in pharmaceutical economics. Now, I am having second thoughts about doing the degree at all.. I am currently working in industry, but would like to work as a health economist. My undergrad was in biotech and economics, and my masters was in biotech. Now, what Im told by people in industry, is to do my 2 year time in my current role, establish myself in the company, at which point I will be able to more easily move into Health Econ. I don't think a single person in the company doing health econ has a PhD. If I was offered a job tomorrow as a health economist in industry, I would 100% take it, and not do a PhD. Is that a strong sign to not do a PhD? I am afraid, that even after I do my 2 years, I will not be able to move in health econ. Whereas, if I did a PhD, I would 99.9% be able to get a job in Health econ. I know that a PhD is not needed to work as a health economist in the pharma industry, but I never want to be turned down for a job, b/c the other candidate had a PhD. Most jobs want experience doing economic and clinical evaluations, and experience doing reimbursement submissions to the government. I have never done this, but this can all be learnt on the job... Thinking out loud, looking for feedback - thanks.

Which is better for health econ/ and health outcomes research?

Hey, There are 2 types of people doing pharmaceutical economics. There are PharmD people that went back to get their PhD's in some aspect of administrative pharmacy - yes they conducted economic research, but not at a very high level, and their work now utilizes econ, but their modeling is not advanced. Then, there are pure econ PhD's that have chosen to do their work in the pharmaceutical industry. For the pure econ folk, many have gone to Mcmaster, U of T, and the US. For the PharmD people, they come from everywhere. I have a background in econ, but no where near rigorous enough to do a pure econ PhD. Instead, using my solid foundation of econ, I will work with a pure econ PhD now doing their work in the Pharma industry. Arguably, the best econ programs in Canada U of T, Mcmaster, and McGill. The best Pharmacy school is hands-down U of T. Canada does not have many programs to study what I am doing - in fact Mac is the only other place, and their program just started this year. I could probably take the same classes at any other Canadian school, but there does not seem to be much research aside from Mcmaster and Toronto. I am leaning towards toronto because Mcmaster is in a shitty city thats a far commute. The potential guy I'd work with at U of T was specifically brought in there to strengthen the school's research in pharmaceutical economics....

I plan to look at large international pharma companies that have locations in Canada.

Reactor: Sorry for my ignorance..so are u saying U of T or U of M?

This is the problem... If I want to stay in Canada, then a degree from U of T is phenomenal...it's Canada's most prestigious school. ON the other hand, in the US, it means nothing.... In Canada, it seems that the only US schools that are widely known are the Iveys...

professors from the faculty of pharmacy would supervise - but they are pure econ PhD people that have now chosen to specialize in parmacoecon..

What is more commonly used in industry for statistics in economics. Some schools say SAS, but lately I have heard that STATA is more comprehensive and more useful... what are your opinions?

Hey, Maryland is ranked 8th in the US for their school of pharmacy, which is the dept that this program is administered through. However, their econ dept is very low ranked ..is it not? This is U Maryland Baltimore, not College Park. U of T is the most prestigious school in Canada, their Pharmacy is probably #1 in Canada, and their econ is top 20 in North America, and # 1 or #2 in canada...(please correct if I am wrong) The money is not the biggest deal - I want to go to the school that will make me the most competent researcher. I want the place that will teach and challenge me the most. Although U of T lacks structure, I can still take all of the same classes that I would at Maryland. If I would like to work in Canada, wouldn't the degree from Toronto look much better?

Yes, I know the Maryland area is much better for industry careers, but is Maryland considered a good school? I know each school has their own strengths, and I know Maryland school of Pharmacy is top 10.

The program is pharmaceutical economics, administered through the faculty of pharmacy. Maryland: 20k stipend plus tuition Toronto: 12k stipend plus tuition Maryland has a structured program, with specializations. U of T has no structure, committee decides what u should take based on your interests and thesis goals. Maryland has a track record of successful graduates. U of T has 1 graduate, because the program is very new. Classes will be taken through the econ and pharmacy faculty, both schools are strong in these areas. as far as faculty, Maryland seems stronger.... What should I do???????

E-mailing programs is a great idea. However, I already have an MS in biotechnology...getting another MS would be an additional 2 years. The PhD would be 4-5 years..and with a PhD, I can never hit a ceiling in my career. When I look at health economist jobs, they all require MS or PhD..same with many health econ consulting companies. I got rejected from all..why...they said they give preference to PhD's. Bottom line: PhD cannot hurt me...can just take 4 years of my life...opportunity cost of that is $$$...which I hope to make back in the next 20 years with the degree...what do u think?

Quant: I don't know of a single senior health economist, or director of health economics without a PhD. As well, the specialty consulting companies (here in Canada) basically only hire PhD's.

I did a professional MS degree, all coursework, no thesis... Applied to a few Pharmaceutical econ PhD programs. These programs ARE NOT administered through the econ dept. They have some econ classes, but no theory.. I have been working in industry for 1 year, and would like to start a PhD in january. I have received admittances everywhere I applied. Question is, if I want a career in industry, no desire to teach, is a PhD a mistake? Most Pharma companies hire PhD's in health econ, and consulting companies love PhD's. So, if teaching is a definite (almost definite) no, is a PhD waste?

They have a program through the faculty of pharmacy, can specialize in any area od administrative pharmacy, including, health outcomes, health econ, etc. The program has zero structure - must take 2 full year courses, and that's it. But, your supervisor will always make sure you take more, at least 1.5 years worth. Some health econ classes are taken in the faculty of pharmacy, while other more traditional econ classes are taken through the Econ dept. Here's my question: how marketable will I be once I graduate. Right now, I want to work in upper management as a health economist in the pharma industry. Currently, I work in the industry, but not in health econ. Who knows, maybe after the PhD, I will want to teach... Anyways, looking for some feedback on this program, how marketable I will be when I graduate, and how far does a PhD from U of T go?

ECON2006: I agree with you...problem is, not sure if I enjoy economic research. I have erely taken dozens of econ classes, and the research experience I have is laboratory scienific work (which I hate) I know the 2 degrees are completely different...problem is, I dont know which I would enjoy.. Im thinking to ask the PhD for a deferral...see if I like working in industry...if I do, go for an MBA later on..what do you think ?

I am not sure whether I want to accept my PhD offer or my job offer. I have never worked in industry before. Is it ethival, or alright, to tell the school that to afford living during the PhD I need more finances, and consequently, I need to work for 1 year before doing it. How will they respond, and i this uncommon ?

Hey, I am a canadian student, that has received a job offer at a top 5 pharma company. I am thinking to work for a few years, and apply for an MBA at Canadian schools. Not neccessarily the top Canadian schools, but schools that has programs that interest me (For instance, Simon Frasier has a biotech MBA). My question is, if I am with a company already, and doing an MBA while still working, does it really matter where I d the degree. I already have a job...I wont be looking for a new company. So, what's the diff if I do my MBA at Harvard or some school in Canada, if I am not looking at getting into a new company, but rather advancing in my current one.. I can understand, if I quit my job to do an MBA, then obviously i need to go to a top school to get into the great companies...but I doubt this will be the case....so....does it really matter ?

I read the thread, but it did not really help me... I am worried that my fascination (not deep passion) for pharmaceutical economics is a recipe for disaster...that I will hate it in 3-5 years... Im thinking an MBA is less specialized, and more (?) financially rewarding. I got married before my masters, and my wife has endured 2 painful years of me studying constantly... I got into top schools for my field, but have no clue if this is where I should be. I know myself, and if I dont do a PhD now, I never will. Im not looking for someone to decide for me, just to give me a better framework for making this decision. It seems impossible.... I dont know if I should accept my job offer with a top 5 healthcare company...or do a PhD..

How can you be certain a PhD is what you want...? Personally, I'm not sure I can spend 5 years in my field...I like having the flexibility that my masters degree gave me, with the option to do a general or specialized MBA later on (which financially, is just as lucrative in the LR).

Caprone: You mentioned that you are a PhD guy..how do you know that, because now I am questionning that. Honestly, the breadth of classes, projects and collaborations during an MBA degree are much more appealing to me than a PhD. An MBA isn't as specialized..I have taken some MBA classes while doing my masters, and loved it. I'm just curious what makes you a PhD guy, so I can perhaps develop some sort of a framework to see if I should accept the PhD or job offer...

Hey, So, I posted a question asking for advice on which school to accept for a PhD in pharmaceutical economics...Maryland or UNC. Today, I got a phone call from a top 5 Pharma company that wants to interview me. Now, I always thought about just working with my masters degree, but have been told the following: 1. There is a ceiling that exists with a masters degree, very difficult to make it to the higher parts of a company 2. Masters students (not MBA) generally make between 80-120k in their careers, while a PhD will get you over the 120k hump 3. PhD opens way more doors, eliminates the ceiling, and has a much higher earning potential. The starting salary is 64,000 plus a very handsome benefits package (yes, they told me this on the phone when I told them I was going to do a PhD). Now, I assume a 3-4% increase per year in salary, unless I get promoted. I am at a total dilemma now. No, a PhD has not been a life dream, actually it became an option after starting my masters. I have spoken to people in industry that tell me a PhD is exceptionally beneficial, and that I will only go so far with a masters. Obviously there are exceptions, but what do you guys think ? I am newly married, and geographic location does not matter. So, obviously taking a job now would be great financially, but perhaps suffering financially for 5 years (whilst doing a PhD) will be phenomenal for the future... HELP! Oh, FYI, I have never worked, been in academia pursuing my masters and bachelors for the last 6 years. So, while the job is in the field Im interested in, I do not have experience.

Hey, It's UMD college Park. I am recently married, so we will not know anyone in either location. Both locations seem great..I am from Canada, so I dont know a ton about either. I have no idea where I'll be after the degree... Do you know anything in particular that is exceptionally positive or negative about either school or city ? Thanks for the advice so far..