@DeepBlue86 just to be totally granular 
Adding them each up. The lower the total, the better (indicating higher ranking)
UChicago – Law 4, Business, 1, medicine 18 = 23
Yale - Law 1, Medicine 11, Business 11 = 23
EQUAL
The practice of medicine is a highly restricted industry. If you look at admit rates of the top 50 Med schools they are, for the most part, under 10%.
In no particular order, what Med School administrators would tend to care most about are things like peer reviews, residence director assessments, the quality of student they are enrolling, and research dollars generated by faculty members on average. Those metrics tend to be pretty good for UChicago overall. When you look at peer reviews and residency assessments side by side for the current top 20, you really do notice some outliers. Same - although to a lesser extent - with MCAT and GPA. Obviously nothing’s in a vacuum and it’s factors taken altogether that matter in how the ordinal is formed. It just goes to show that the result can be a bit wacky compared to the underlying metrics. Overall, UChicago seems to be ranked about right. Not sure about a few others. In the end, quality is going to be associated with dollars, and so those institutions generating the large dollars will have an edge both in terms of cutting-edge research and attracting the big brass.
^^ Meant to add something else. Peer review is, in part, based on ground-breaking work that the institution has done. When you look at who has won the Nobel for medicine/physiology in, say, the past 50 years, UChicago loses out to a whole bunch of other places. Obviously, centers of research and STEMmy places - not necessarily med schools - are the nurturing environments for a good number of these folks. But Stanford, Harvard, Columbia, Vandy, WUSTL, and some of the UC schools do hold their own for comparison. Two notable absences: UChicago and, shockingly, Mayo (given that it’s supposedly a research powerhouse rivalling JHU).
@Chrchill “Residency is what matters most.”
Agree. Brother in law went to a non top 100 med school in NY. Achieved his dual PhD/MD and got his residency at Columbia University Medical Center (NY Presbyterian Hospital) and now works as a pediatric anesthesiologist Texas Children’s Hospital as well as assistant professor Baylor College of Medicine.
Is quality of residency independent of quality of med school? Not sure of that - not the least because underlying both may be top med students who become top docs. Unfortunately, many of the highest ranked med schools aren’t revealing what percentage of the graduating class gets their first choice residency. That would seem a pertinent metric when ranking these places.
@JBStillFlying the percentage of med students who get their top choice residency is extremely complex, assuming you are talking about rank lists. To rank a program, you have to first get an interview there. So let’s say my “dream residency” is anesthesia at Stanford. But I don’t get an interview there. In fact, I don’t get ANY anesthesia interviews. So I rank a local preliminary program #1 and match there. Voila, I matched at my top rank program.
Most medical schools extensively counsel their students where to apply. The goal is to be realistic with applicants, so that everyone ends up with SOMETHING.
Ranking is a beauty contest: nothing more and nothing less. No one should take it too seriously.
Booth is ranked No. 1 By USNWR. As a GSB graduate, am I particularly proud or happy? Not really. That just means Booth being the flavor of the year for this particular ranking. I know in general business world people likely still rank HBS and SGSB much higher.
Make no mistake, I am proud of my U of C GSB education. But I am not going to let any ranking define my world view of MBA programs.
Theorem (College Confidential Booster): for any university, we can construct a non-trivial collection of rankings such that this university appears to be the best or arbitrary close to the best in these rankings
Proof: Left as an exercise for the collective consciousness of College Confidential
I think this is a two part discussion. If the question is where is the “best” research done, then these rankings are interesting (I put quotes around"best" because defining best is another matter). But best research is only lightly correlated to the "best"doctor for you for a given ailment. For example in cancer the protocols are so defined by the insurance companies that the variation in treatment for a given diagnosis is not high. Also, it matters where you live-if you have a certain type of lymphoma the guy who has done the most published research is at MD Anderson in Houston - good luck if you live in (say) Maine. So likely you will go to someone local who will follow protocol, and if there is something real quirky about the case your local MD will call or email the MD Anderson guy (BTW these super guru MDs are uniformly good about responding with advice to fellow MDs). Anyways the “best” doctor is a bit like the search for the holy grail.
My favorite current story is IBM’s effort through “Watson” to “automate” cancer treatment- turns out it basically incorporates Sloan Kettering’s protocols (thats the doctors they interviewed) and the issue is the rest of the world may or may not agree…for example the japanese get the most incidences of gastric cancer, have developed their own protocols,and basically ignore Watson.
^^@HydeSnark - every Admissions Office in the country has already proved that theorem.
Fact is and remains that USNWR is by a mile the most influential and quoted ranking in the business. Just ask the deans who fret over it year in year out.
This is a big deal for Booth.
It a sign of brand consolidation. It edged out Wharton and Stanford in the last remaining ranking that has never put it on top of those two. .
It is free advertising. Newspapers TV, news sites and niche websites are referencing this news. CNBC, WSJ, Bloomberg are using the words “best”, “top”, “world famous” to refer to the Booth School.
And it will improve their already successful fundraising campaigns. The new dean is probably seeing a lot of $$$$ signs right now.
As for the college, this will be awesome for the Bus Econ major. 
… I just had to say that…
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/m/b2d1a42f-b383-32c4-bb4b-a29559c4596b/ss_university-of-chicago%26apos%3Bs.html I agree this is a big deal.
Booth deserves a top slot somewhere in the top 5 - the exactly placement doesn’t matter.
What DOES matter is that Kellogg is slipping. They dinged me once, so I laugh at their pain now hahahahahahaha. Quants rule, brand managers drool.
see the below from Uchicago medicine:
" The University of Chicago Biological Sciences Division moved up one notch to No. 13 — with the paleontology program retaining its top rating and the ecology & evolution program placing 8th — in the 2019 edition of U.S. News & World Report’s survey of the country’s best biological sciences doctoral programs. Meanwhile, the Pritzker School of Medicine placed No. 18 among the best medical schools for research.
Of the 144 medical schools surveyed by U.S. News, Pritzker tied with Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai for the 18th spot, with the primary care program placing No. 39. In the previous year, Pritzker was ranked No. 15 among research medical schools and its primary care program was listed at No. 34.
Despite a slight drop over the previous year, Pritzker remains the highest-ranking research medical school in Illinois, ahead of Northwestern University’s Feinberg School of Medicine (No. 20). In addition, Pritzker tied with Harvard Medical School and the University of Pennsylvania as the nation’s third-most selective medical school and ranked among the top five in the country for average National Institutes of Health funding per faculty member ($271,000).
U.S. News released new ratings for the nation’s 275 biological sciences programs, which are ranked every four years. UChicago’s paleontology program, which draws from the interdepartmental and inter-institutional Committee on Evolutionary Biology, remains the No. 1-rated program in the country, as it has been for more than a decade. The Biological Sciences Division’s doctoral programs tied for No. 13 with Rockefeller University in New York and Washington University in St. Louis. UChicago’s ecology & evolutionary program ranked No. 8, down from No. 4 four years ago.
“These results continue to reflect the rigor and excellence of our graduate programs,” said Kenneth S. Polonsky, MD, executive vice president of medical affairs at the University of Chicago and the dean of the Biological Sciences Division and Pritzker School of Medicine.
The results are scheduled to be made public Tuesday, March 20. The full list of U.S. News medical school rankings is available at usnews.com. "
@Chrchill - couldn’t that UChicago Medicine article simply read: “most areas of UChicago Medicine continue to decline - especially Pritzker. Northwestern Med has closed the gap, and now threatens to overtake Pritzker as the top-ranked med school in Illinois. Total NIH funding has declined. UChicago Hospitals, once in the top 20 in the nation, remains unranked. Oh, and by the way, Northwestern’s Hospitals are poaching our faculty and enjoy a top ten rank. Please send us lots and lots of donations. The only way out of this downward spiral is cash. We are now the largest and most mediocre division in the entire university.”
@cue7. Me thinks that there should be a happy medium between Fox News and MSNBC …
Half-empty vs. half-full. The metrics that they mention (selectivity and funding/faculty member) are decent metrics for comparison purposes. It does seem like a couple of institutions leaped over the competition and are a bit out of place when you look at some of the underlying stats. Time will tell. If UChicago’s GMAT and slectivity decline, that spells trouble, but for now it’s still clearly perceived as a top school for those interested in what it does. Pritzker isn’t going to be for everyone.
^NMAT not GMAT. I take it you are a Boothie. #1!
LOL. mCAT.