Share this with your social networks Share Print this page Print Contact us Contact

Ranking of Biomedical Engineering and Bioengineering Graduate Schools

Find An Online Program Now

The rankings below have been generated using the priorities you set. You can change your priorities or get rankings for a different field.

About the rankings »

The box plots in the "Rank" column show the uncertainty in each program's ranking. Learn more.
Hover over table headers to see more details.
Data sources and weights for each item are listed at the bottom of the page.
Better values are shown in green. Worse values are shown in red.
Learn more about the ranking algorithm.

« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

Your Ranking of Biomedical Engineering and Bioengineering PhD Programs

Programs 1–30

Rank	Program	Regres Quality	Survey Quality	Student Outcomes	Jobs at Grad	Diversity	Female Students	Female Faculty
1-5	University of California-San Francisco Bioengineering	2-9	2-6	6-32	67%	14-39	41%	26%
1-9	CUNY Graduate School and University Center Biomedical Engineering	18-43	5-28	12-55	83%	1-4	46%	36%
1-12	University of California-San Diego Bioengineering	1-5	2-6	13-48	68%	59-70	39%	10%
2-13	University of California-Berkeley Bioengineering	2-9	2-6	6-32	43%	14-39	41%	26%
1-12	University of Washington-Seattle Campus Bioengineering	1-6	3-16	14-46	63%	10-31	47%	17%
1-15	California Institute of Technology Bioengineering	1-8	1-1	11-49	73%*	69-73	24%	0%
3-20	University of Pennsylvania Bioengineering	5-15	5-27	10-40	80%	15-48	52%	8%
3-21	Rice University Bioengineering	5-21	4-21	5-26	62%	33-60	34%	28%
3-25	Thomas Jefferson University Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine	21-46	8-38	1-5	73%*	39-67	44%	27%
3-22	Yale University Biomedical Engineering	7-18	2-12	14-57	73%*	35-62	39%	12%
5-24	Emory University Biomedical Engineering	16-38	11-35	9-36	73%*	10-38	54%	22%
6-25	Georgia Institute of Technology-Main Campus Biomedical Engineering	16-38	11-35	9-36	71%	10-38	54%	22%
7-26	University of Wisconsin-Madison Biomedical Engineering	18-37	9-35	3-18	89%	11-29	32%	20%
6-29	Georgia Institute of Technology-Main Campus Bioengineering	7-21	8-34	10-48	71%	18-45	39%	20%
7-32	New Jersey Institute of Technology Biomedical Engineering	38-60	16-47	1-10	NA	2-7	50%	25%
Rank	Program	Regres Quality	Survey Quality	Student Outcomes	Jobs at Grad	Diversity	Female Students	Female Faculty
8-29	Johns Hopkins University Biomedical Engineering	8-21	5-26	13-50	76%	12-32	37%	12%
8-31	Columbia University in the City of New York Biomedical Engineering	12-30	7-34	37-68	78%	16-44	40%	19%
7-31	Duke University Biomedical Engineering	3-13	4-25	19-55	67%	31-57	33%	14%
7-31	Oregon Health & Science University Biomedical Engineering	22-45	11-35	1-8	NA	36-65	38%	25%
8-31	Massachusetts Institute of Technology Biological Engineering, Health Science and Technology	1-6	3-17	73-74	78%	48-65	32%	15%
9-31	Boston University Biomedical Engineering	5-18	9-32	20-53	76%	40-62	29%	19%
12-36	University of Maryland-College Park Bioengineering	15-34	5-20	4-31	73%*	19-48	42%	0%
12-34	University of Virginia-Main Campus Biomedical Engineering	9-21	7-28	31-63	80%	40-65	38%	4%
12-39	University of California-Los Angeles Biomedical Engineering	10-33	8-38	24-58	82%	51-67	37%	15%
14-37	Purdue University-Main Campus Biomedical Engineering	24-49	24-53	2-19	83%	12-33	39%	18%
13-41	Stony Brook University Biomedical Engineering	27-53	10-41	3-29	80%*	31-60	34%	22%
15-39	University of Michigan-Ann Arbor Biomedical Engineering	3-13	4-25	50-69	66%	17-45	34%	6%
15-44	Pennsylvania State University-Main Campus Bioengineering	21-48	8-37	3-27	73%	17-52	44%	4%
15-41	University of California-Irvine Biomedical Engineering	19-43	10-41	16-59	100%	46-66	31%	6%
19-42	Case Western Reserve University Biomedical Engineering	6-17	19-46	30-59	73%	35-61	31%	14%

« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

Item Descriptions

Rank: A range indicating how this program ranked in 500 simulated rankings based on your priorities. Programs are sorted by their median rank. Learn more.
NRC regression-based quality measure (Regres Quality): The NRC's measurements of overall program quality are based on 20 key variables (19 in the humanities) such as GRE scores, student support and faculty publications. To calculate the regression-based quality measure, the relative importance, or weight, of a variable was set by the extent that it correlated with programs viewed most favorably by evaluators in each field. Learn more. Your weight = 3. Larger values are better. (Source: NRC, 2010)
NRC survey-based quality measure (Survey Quality): The NRC's measurements of overall program quality are based on 20 key variables (19 in the humanities) such as GRE scores, student support and faculty publications. To calculate the survey-based quality measure, evaluators in each field identified the variables that they considered to be the most important indicators of program quality. Learn more. Your weight = 5. Larger values are better. (Source: NRC, 2010)
Student support and outcomes (Student Outcomes): This variable is a composite of other measures of student support and outcomes, including 6-year or 8-year graduation rates (for non-humanities programs and humanities programs, respectively), time to degree, job placement within academia, percentage of first-year students with full financial support, and whether a program collects data about the employment outcomes of its graduates. The relative importance of these variables was determined by the direct assessments of some 50 faculty in each field. Your weight = 2. Larger values are better. (Source: NRC, 2010)
Placement Rate (Jobs at Grad): This variable shows the percentage of students with definite plans at graduation (either a job or a postdoctoral position), based on data from the student questionnaire. Your weight = 2. Larger values are better. (Source: SED, 2000–2004)
Diversity in the academic environment (Diversity): This variable shows a composite measure of diversity generated by the National Research Council. It includes data on percent of faculty and students from underrepresented minorities, percent of female faculty and students, and percent of international faculty and students. The relative importance of these variables was determined by the direct assessments of some 50 faculty in each field. Your weight = 1. Larger values are better. (Source: NRC, 2010)
Percentage of female students (Female Students): The percentage of female doctoral students Your weight = 2. Larger values are better. (Source: NRC, 2010)
Percentage of female faculty (Female Faculty): This measure reports the percentage of female faculty members, based on data from a 2006 program questionnaire. Faculty allocations were not considered in the calculation. Your weight = 2. Larger values are better. (Source: NRC, 2010)

Data Sources

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: IPEDS is an annual, comprehensive set of surveys of all colleges and universities in the United States. The surveys are conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics. Learn more
National Research Council: The National Research Council conducts periodic assessments of doctoral programs in the United States. Our data comes from the most recent assessment in 2010. Learn more
Survey of Earned Doctorates: The NSF/NIH/NEH/USED/USDA/NASA Survey of Earned Doctorates is an annual survey of all new recipients of doctorates from US universities at graduation. The average of the response rates for the 2000–2004 surveys was 92%. Learn more
Survey of Graduate Students and Postdoctorates in Science and Engineering: The Survey is an annual assessment of the number and characteristics of graduate students and postdoctoral researchers in science, engineering, and health-related fields It is conducted by the National Science Foundation. Learn more

* Value is missing. The value shown is based on the average for other programs in the same field. Learn more.

The graduate school rankings on PhDs.org have been made possible by grants from The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and The Burroughs Wellcome Fund.
The National Postdoctoral Association and The Center for Science and the Media have served as the project's fiscal sponsors.