Prosper Health
Anybody here work for Prosper Health? What’s your experience?
Anybody here work for Prosper Health? What’s your experience?
Graduating undergrad senior in June this year. Passionate about mental health and psych research, but overall very confused about the future. Unsure if PhD is the right career fit. Long post ahead :'')
Deciding between a job offer at a top boutique healthcare/biotech consulting firm, or continuing my research interests in psychology and neuroscience as a postbacc research coordinator. The consulting firm pays 98k (w/ guaranteed 10ish% raise each year and increased % of bonuses every year too), research pays 50-60k in the same expensive geographies.
I genuinely love research and had been interested in pursuing a PhD in Clinical Psych for the past 2.5 years, but I don't know if I can commit to years of poverty wages and low savings. Especially given the fact that a psychologist's average entry level salary at 30 years old is, approx what my salary would be at 22 if I took this job, lol. My long-term career interest would be to have one foot in industry and one foot in the science/clinical stuff, do some sort of translational research and impact work (public health, startups, venture?). I don't want to become a professor. I can definitely see myself doing part-time clinical and assessment work as I have enjoyed my clinical volunteering so far.
My thought process was that I will work the consulting job for a year, see how it goes, and if I miss research or have some epiphany I will apply to research jobs again next year. But a major concern of mine is that even a year away could diminish my attractiveness as a researcher... I will be questioned why I left to do consulting and why I am coming back, v.s. students who are all-in.
I will have 3 years of undergrad research experience when I graduate this June, with 3 poster presentations, a couple fellowships from prestigious psych organizations, and an honors thesis, no pubs (but 2-3 papers in the publication pipeline over the next couple years hopefully!). And am graduating from a top 10 university in the US with a 3.7, CS + Psych. But I still definitely have a long way to go in terms of thoroughly exploring and learning various methodologies/analysis techniques and further refining my specific research interests.
So, now for my questions: What would you do if you were me? In all honestly, I am strongly leaning to the consulting job right now. But, if I want to reapply to postbacc CRC/RA roles next year... how will people view me? Will I be viewed as noncommital? And would there be there a way to frame or explain my consulting experience?
Future-looking questions: I deeply want a PhD because I love research. Have loved doing my honors thesis, and my other side RA jobs. I still have so many questions I want to pursue and am so inspired by specific labs I have interviewed with. But, I am also passionate about translational work. I can see myself being a researcher/advisor at a mental health tech company or running a health organization or doing scientific communications work as well as clinical work. And I also care about money and want to be financially well-off. I know, I know, these are all tall asks. So I don't know if a PhD in Clinical Psych is the correct path for me. Maybe a PhD in a different area. Or, in retirement, lol. I have also considered healthcare law. MD I am not interested in at all. I'm all ears if people have other ideas.
hi all!
i am a senior undergraduate student about to graduate with a BS in neuroscience with a minor in psychology. i plan on taking a gap year to help boost my applications for when i do apply. however, i have had a hard time navigating through what the best steps would be. i have been looking into getting a job in a related area to help, but most of what i see is RBT/ABA jobs. i am interested but it is not really my long-term goals to do that type of work. i have been thinking about getting a PsyD and then maybe going into forensic psychology. i have also been trying to gain research experience, but i do not have anything concrete yet.
i am a pretty average applicant as of now. i know how small the PsyD cohorts are and there are many strong applicants out there. i have been in a psychology research lab and a small internship in child development for a year but will soon stop once i graduate. i don't have any publications, and my GPA is a 3.04. i have a pretty strong background in neuroscience and psychology through my courses though.
is it best to pursue a master's to compensate for a low undergraduate GPA? my GPA really struggled when i was a human physiology major before i switched to neuroscience. i started to do way better my last 2 years of college after the switch (i didn't enjoy my classes, and had to take A&P, physics, orgo 1 & 2.. all of which i did very mehh in).
ANY advice would be greatly appreciated. also noting that i am in a blessed situation where relocating for jobs or research opportunities will not be an issue for me.
i’m a phd student with a decent amount of assessment experience under my belt. i’ve been looking for ways to earn an income as I lost funding from my program following a LoA and was told i can look into taking a position as a psychometrist. the problem is, i’ve barely found any! over the last few months i’ve only come across two postings. one completely ignored me, and the other interviewed me but ended up going with someone full-time.
i’ve also asked around in my program and haven’t had much luck. i live in a major metro with a large med center, but it’s a different city from where my university is located.
how do people actually find psychometrist positions? are these jobs mostly word-of-mouth? do people cold-email private practices / neuropsych offices / hospitals? am i maybe searching the wrong job titles? there are basically none posted in my area, which is surprising to me given how big the city is. TIA!
Im Canadian undergrad, I didnt get honours unfortunately but I really want clinical grad school (ideally doctorate but I stay open to direct entry Masters first if needed), this being said I hear Psy.D is a possible pathway to clinical (USA or abroad like Australia, UK, etc) but I have also heard it is insane expensive at least in the usa— Is this true? Is it worth it? I just don't want to research schools outside of Canada and waste my time if it's not a good move.
My alternative is applying into counseling grad school of some sort.. Canada or outside of Canada..although I would really prefer clinical for the scope and psychopathology.
*I didnt get honours as I started in another major and swapped late, and my first couple years were rough so I really don't want to spend more $ / time upping gpa for it*
Thanks friends!
Hi everyone!
I passed my EPPP today with a 627. My highest score on a Prepjet exam was a 59. I just wanted to share that as I felt anxious before the test because of my low practice test scores.
If using Prepjet, I would definitely recommend the content summaries and watching all the lectures. I felt like I had a decent understanding of the content even though my practice scores were low. I appreciate everyone’s advice on this subreddit.
To everyone who is nervous about the exam, you can do it!
I got my MS in psych with a forensic speciality and now I’m not sure what avenue to take. I don’t want to go into a doctoral program because I just don’t think I have it in me to do more school plus $$$. I’d love to do assessments or counseling in some capacity. I really would love to work as a civilian in the military, doing assessments or evaluations even providing counseling to families. What are some options that anyone could suggest? I’m in the US. I’ve even thought of going into HR with this degree and doing evaluations within the business world. I feel so stuck and want to move forward just not sure where to go
Is this standard compliance oversight, or are these platforms taking on employer-level control while keeping contractor labels? If that’s the direction, when do we start asking for benefits?
Is this normal compliance language, payer pressure, or a sign something bigger is happening with telehealth platforms?
Anyone have insight?
Summary:
They’re formalizing increased monitoring of billing, coding, and documentation, may request charts/records, and can require education or corrective action plans if issues are found. They emphasized this does not change providers’ independent contractor status or clinical autonomy.
1-What triggered it, if you know?
2-What did they ask for (progress notes, treatment plans, intake, billing records, etc.)?
3-How far back did they go?
4-Was it random, targeted, or tied to certain CPT codes/frequency?
5-How stressful or manageable was the process in reality?
6-Any lessons learned or things you wish you had documented differently?
Also, if anyone has a solid “audit-proof” or very strong progress note template they’d be willing to share, I’d be incredibly grateful. Always trying to improve documentation and stay prepared. THANK YOU🙏🏻
Hey everyone! I'm currently a senior at the University of Texas at San Antonio and I'm planning on applying to Ph.D. programs this august. I was hoping to gain some insight as to where my CV stands and what I could do to improve it. My institution GPA is 3.5 and my major is a little over 3.7. Kind of nervous as I don't really have an accurate idea as to where I stand among applicants and I don't think my GPA is super great. Coming up, I am (hopefully) publishing a literature review on disordered eating with my professor, presenting at the APA convention in DC and have an internship coming up at the local juvenile probation center working on psych evals so I'm hoping that these things will give me a bit more of a boost. Anyways, thank you all for the help!
I'm a research coordinator and this is my very first manuscript. I started working on this a year ago, and other co-authors have come and gone due to commitment issues, but it's still not submission ready. My PI has been supportive about guiding me in this process, but after months of going back and forth about edits, my PI told me honestly my writing is too broad and not scientifically framed and she doesn't know how to coach me on this. This was mentioned in the past, but she suggested I pause and look at courses.
I believe a few factors are keeping me stuck on this, including the topic being written about not something I'm particularly passionate about. I also had to learn on the go, as I wasn't as familiar with some of the variables examined and would have to spend hours at times pouring over literature to come up with one sentence. I have done multiple posters, and my writing there is fine, but it's this particular manuscript that I seem to be stuck on. I would much rather start another manuscript on a topic I've done a poster in and much more passionate and knowledgeable about, but I've been at this current one for too long to give up. Please help! Appreciate all the advice!
I’m in my second year of university in Canada and hope to pursue a phd or psyd in clinical psychology. I will be doing an honours thesis, and will be working on multiple other research projects in the next two years. In my second year, I got a minimum A- (3.7) in all the psych courses I’ve taken. However, my first year grades were a mess. I have diagnosed obsessive-compulsive disorder and was dealing with a horrible episode during my first year. As a result I had poor grades. Most of my psych courses in first year were in the B to A- range. However, I took abnormal psych the spring after first year and got a C. It had nothing to do with a lack of interest in the subject, I was just struggling a lot.
I’m sure that my cumulative gpa will be above 3.5 and am doing a lot better now, however I’m worried that my first year (especially the C) will ruin my chances of ever getting in.
TLDR: Got a few Bs and a C in abnormal psych in my first year but doing a lot better now. Can I still get into clinical psych grad programs in Canada or the US?
Applying to post bacc jobs and on the job portals it says to attach resume but should I be attaching my CV instead or do they specifically want a more streamlined resume
My BIL called me today asking me to be a part of an intervention for my sister who has been to rehab 3 times. This would be her 4th time. I have not ever been involved in any type of intervention before. She has two kids aged 12&14 and she drinks excessively daily and has apparently driven with them in the car on multiple occasions according to what I’ve been told. She has a weed vape and has apparently developed a relationship with another guy while in her last rehab I think from last June.
Anyway I really don’t have a relationship with my sister. I stopped trying entirely 6 months ago due to her behavior and she would reject all invitations to get together and I honestly barely know her. I want to make an impactful statement at this rehab but feel almost out of place in doing so because I don’t really know what to say beyond my own emotions or feeling like I’m being accusatory?
I’ve written a draft and trying to use AI (sorry) to censor me or help me formulate how to correctly address someone in an intervention. But that’s why I’m here because I don’t want to use AI I want some real human guidance on what would work. I can attach my draft if it would be helpful.
I guess what I’m asking is what is my role here in this intervention? I’m almost an estranged sister. But I’m here and happy to help in anyway that I can if I can make any small difference, I’ll certainly try.
Please show me some grace it’s been a really difficult period of time for the family in general and we are all hurting.
Basically, I have no interest in teaching, research, or assessments. However, I wanna be the best therapist I can possibly be, and PsyD has more rigorous training for its therapists. I'm guessing psychologists might have a higher therapy ceiling than social workers do. I'm going to be putting in the work after I graduate to better myself as a therapist, regardless of whether I'm a PsyD or LMSW. Can an LCSW be equally good at therapy as a psychologist that's great at therapy? What do you guys think? Should I really go into PsyD to be a better therapist even though I have no interest in assessments?
I know this subreddit gets a lot of EPPP posts, but I've got a bit of a unique one to throw your way.
My friend can't pass the EPPP and I don't know what to do. They started studying in 2020 (yes, you read that correctly) and have taken it about 9-10 times (this is not an exaggeration) at this point. They finished their doctorate in 2019 and did their post-doc immediately following that.
They have tried using AATBS, PsychPrep, and PrepJet. They've used a private one-on-one tutor. I've spent endless hours helping them study.
The first time they took the EPPP, they scored about 405. Following that, they ended up scoring in the high 300s. Eventually, they got back to about 405 around the 6th or 7th time they took it. And the next time, they actually got to, I think, 435. Then, the final time they took it about a year ago, they scored about 415.
Even more baffling - the areas that they score high and low in change from test to test. None of it makes any sense. There is zero pattern to the results.
I feel like there's just something about how the EPPP is worded that trips them up tremendously. We can have discussions about the subject matter and they show understanding of it, but when it comes to EPPP questions, it feels like their brain is gone.
I feel like I'm losing my mind. I feel so bad for them because, as we all know, EPPP test taking and test prep is not cheap. They have to have spent well north of 10 grand trying to do this. And we're in California, where there aren't really much in the way of options for unlicensed psychologists.
At this point, I just don't know what to do.
Anybody else think it is messed up how there is a monopoly on science?
So using these 2 points together, clinicians are forced to abide by existing/old research, and are not able to mention their own observations. Yet, throughout history, research can start with observations, and in many cases observations are later backed up by research. That is how science works: first there are hypothesis based on observations, then they are tested. And evidence is not always concrete: it can change/be upgraded over time. Ideally there would always be empirical studies, but the fact is this is not always practically possible, or not possible to be done within a timely manner. So a cost/benefit analysis will need to be done: if there is logical reason based on an observation based on a large sample size, and if informed consent is given and the course of action does not harm, then why not allow it?
I will use ADHD as an example.
For a long time I have observed that DSM has room for improvement. It lists certain hyperactivity, impulsivity, inattention symptoms as diagnostic criteria. Yet, the issue is that this is a neurobiological disorder. That means that its symptoms are stemming from a set of brain processes. But brain processes do not always uniformly manifest in the exact same symptoms in different people. So already a categorical diagnostic system for this type of disorder is problematic.
There have been 2 main brain findings in terms of ADHD: dopamine dysregulation and small brain size, in certain regions. So it logically follows that all symptoms follow from these.
This becomes problematic because not everybody has all or the same symptoms, but they will be likely to have a bunch of them.
Also, this blurs the line between "diagnostic criteria symptoms" and "associated features". For example, people with ADHD are significantly more likely to abuse substances, have emotional regulation issues, have excessive shopping/eating, and even depression/anxiety. The problem is that all of these issues can happen outside of ADHD as well/due to other causes. So looking solely at the superficial symptoms is problematic: it depends on why it is happening. For example, someone can abuse substances due to ADHD, but also due to trauma. And, obviously, people without ADHD can have depression/anxiety.
So why is it that the DSM solely has hyperactivity/impulsivity, and inattentiveness? Especially when not everybody with ADHD has all of these either (just like not everybody has all of the associated features/symptoms mentioned above)? So, given that A) all symptoms stem from the biological brain aspects B) not everybody has all the symptoms, should it not be that, if a categorical approach based on superficial symptoms is being used to diagnosed, the associated features/symptoms (e.g., substance abuse, emotional dysregulation, etc...) should also be listed as diagnostic criteria, or at least as "associated features to watch out for that can influence diagnosis" instead of being completely negated as they are now, because at the end of the day using a categorical approach like this is limited to associations altogether?
But the issue is that clinicians cannot say/do this: If they see an adult with no hyperactivity/impulsivity as per DSM criteria (remember, in adulthood hyperactivity tends to wane), and with some inattentiveness but just under the minimum number of DSM criteria for that category, yet with a bunch or all of symptoms from this list: substance abuse, depression/anxiety, impulsivity with shopping/eating, etc... and something like a history of being put on SSRIs and not responding (this is a thing in ADHD: serotonin and dopamine can have inverse effect, that is, raising serotonin can further decrease dopamine, exacerbating ADHD symptoms, and if the depression/anxiety is caused by the ADHD, then this will not help someone with ADHD) and then being put on an SNRI like Welbutrin by their family doctor (norepinephrine is somewhat implicated in ADHD, so it makes sense that an SNRI may work a little bit for someone with ADHD, at least better than an SSRI, but usually not nearly as well as a stimulant, which raises dopamine levels, which are low in ADHD and cause many of the symptoms), then the clinician still cannot diagnose, because they would be accused of not abiding by DSM/going against "evidence based practice". And then what would they have to do, become a professor and then do a research study to prove this, in order to be able to diagnose their patients?
This is further complicated by how many family doctors don't know much about ADHD: that is why they keep putting people who present with depression/anxiety on SSRIs, and then if they have ADHD that tends to not help, so then they switch to an SNRI. But they don't catch the ADHD. They instead treat the presenting symptoms in isolation: dep/anxiety: SSRI; weight gain: GLP-1 drugs. Substance abuse: referral to rehab, etc... Then the person comes to therapy, and the clinicians is unable to diagnose with ADHD, and without a diagnosis, they cannot get stimulants. And at the same time, the clinician is not allowed to talk about medication, so they cannot help the family doctor in terms figuring out that hey you might want to try stimulants. Unfortunately, many psychiatrists, especially older ones, are also not too aware about ADHD, and will often misdiagnose as bipolar or BPD. So the clinician is put in a tough spot. This is what happens when bureaucracy wins over common sense. The bureaucratic reason for all this is to safeguard "evidence based practice": so they say you need to go according to existing practice guidelines and existing research. While this is reasonable: everything has a point: when something does more harm than good/is too literal, maybe it is time to loosen up the rules. Because this will make clinicians' hands tied and unless they complete a research study themselves, which is not a practical possibility for most clinicians, they cannot do anything else about this.
And similarly, the bureaucracy is trying to protect patients by not having those without adequate relevant education talk about medication, but again, when this goes too far, it can hurt, not help patients. I mean is it really bad if a psychologist with their experience and seeing these patterns symptoms gently, without prescribing or telling anyone to take or get off a certain medication, says things like "given your history/symptoms you might want to try stimulants under supervision of a prescribing professional" or "yea, taking those benzos every time you feel anxious or panicky is kind of against the principles of exposure therapy... you might wanna bring that up with your prescribing professional who does not understand this". So the clinician has their hands unnecessarily zip tied, and who suffers is the patient.
For example I have been saying this stuff about for ADHD a long time. Now there is one study that backs it up:
Does this mean that if observations based on logical reasoning and seeing patterns after years of practice were automatically wrong and only become true once a study has been administered? What would have been the harm in trying stimulants quicker for someone on the suspected basis of ADHD?
I take the EPPP in 8 days and I feel like I’m going to fail. I’ve been using the AATBS software and I haven’t been able to score higher than 59% on any of the practice tests. I heard the AATBS practice tests are notoriously difficult, but it’s discouraging to have been studying for weeks on end (I study a bunch in a week and then take a practice test at the end of the week) only to be getting like 2-3 more questions right on each subsequent test. I feel horrible, like all this work I’m doing is for nothing and that I’m going to have to delay my career and pay more money to take it again.
Any advice/encouragement would be amazing!
Applying to post bacc jobs and on the job portals it says to attach resume but should I be attaching my CV instead or do they specifically want a more streamlined resume