University Ranking Methodology
Version 1.0 — Every score explained. Every source cited. Every decision open to challenge.
Why we publish this page
Every score on route.doctor is built from verifiable, publicly available data. We publish this methodology in full because:
- You deserve to know exactly how we reached every conclusion
- Any university, researcher, or user who believes a score is incorrect should be able to point to the specific criterion and source they dispute
- Independence means nothing if the methodology is hidden
If you believe a score is wrong, read this page, identify the specific criterion, find the source you believe we should have used, and contact us. We review every challenge and publish every correction.
What the score measures
The route.doctor score measures how well a university serves the practical needs of an international student seeking a medical, dental, veterinary, or pharmacy degree taught in English in Europe.
The score is a tool for international student decision-making. It is not a general university ranking.
What it measures
- Degree recognition internationally
- Total cost of study
- Admission accessibility
- Career and licensing outcomes
- Language and teaching quality
- Location, safety, and support services
What it does not measure
- General academic prestige
- Research output alone
- How the university is perceived domestically
- Whether the university is "good" in any absolute sense
A university can be outstanding for domestic students and score modestly because it does not serve international English-taught students well.
The eight categories
The total score is calculated out of 100 points across eight categories. Each category is weighted to reflect its practical importance.
| Category | Weight | Maximum points |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Degree Recognition | 25% | 25 |
| 2. Cost and Financial | 25% | 25 |
| 3. Admission Accessibility | 20% | 20 |
| 4. Academic Quality | 10% | 10 |
| 5. Career and Licensing Outcomes | 10% | 10 |
| 6. Language and Teaching | 3% | 3 |
| 7. Location and Lifestyle | 4% | 4 |
| 8. Practical and Support | 3% | 3 |
| Total | 100% | 100 |
The final published score is expressed as a figure out of 5 (dividing the total by 20) for readability.
Category 1 — Degree Recognition
This is the most important category for every student regardless of nationality or career destination. A degree that cannot be used where the student wants to practice is worthless regardless of the quality of education. Every criterion in this category is binary — the university either appears on the relevant official list or it does not.
| Criterion | Points | Source | How we check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Listed in WHO World Directory of Medical Schools (WDMS) | 5 | wdoms.org | Search university name and country |
| EU Directive 2005/36/EC Annex V listed | 5 | EUR-Lex official EU legislation database | Check Annex V of Directive 2005/36/EC |
| GMC approved / graduates eligible for PLAB pathway | 5 | gmc-uk.org | GMC recognition and PLAB eligibility list |
| ECFMG / USMLE eligible | 5 | ecfmg.org IMED database | Search IMED for university listing |
| MCI / NMC India approved | 3 | nmc.org.in | NMC India approved overseas institutions list |
| National accreditation by home country Ministry of Education | 2 | Official Ministry of Education | Ministry published accreditation register |
Important: EU Directive 2005/36/EC Annex V is the single most consequential criterion for most students. A degree listed in Annex V is automatically recognised across all 27 EU member states without any equivalence examination or additional licensing process.
Category 2 — Cost and Financial
Cost is the second most important factor for the majority of international students. This category measures the total financial commitment required — tuition fees plus cost of living — across the full duration of the degree.
2A — Annual tuition fee (10 points)
| Annual tuition fee | Points |
|---|---|
| Under €5,000 | 10 |
| €5,001 – €7,000 | 8 |
| €7,001 – €9,000 | 6 |
| €9,001 – €11,000 | 5 |
| €11,001 – €13,000 | 4 |
| €13,001 – €15,000 | 3 |
| €15,001 – €18,000 | 2 |
| Over €18,000 | 1 |
2B — Estimated monthly cost of living (10 points)
Source: Numbeo Cost of Living Index — the most widely used independent cost of living database.
| Numbeo Cost of Living Index (city) | Points |
|---|---|
| Under 35 (very low cost) | 10 |
| 35 – 45 | 8 |
| 45 – 55 | 6 |
| 55 – 65 | 4 |
| 65 – 75 | 2 |
| Over 75 | 1 |
2C — Scholarship or financial aid availability (5 points)
| Criterion | Points |
|---|---|
| University-funded scholarships for international students — published and accessible | 3 |
| Government or national scholarships available to international students for this programme | 2 |
Category 3 — Admission Accessibility
This category measures how accessible the university is for international applicants — not how easy it is academically, but how straightforward the admission process is and what barriers exist to entry.
3A — Entrance exam requirement (8 points)
| Entrance requirement | Points | Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| No entrance exam — admission based on qualifications only | 8 | Maximum accessibility |
| Interview only — no written exam | 6 | Low barrier |
| Written exam in 1 subject | 5 | Manageable preparation |
| Written exam in 2 subjects | 3 | Substantial preparation |
| Written exam in 3 or more subjects (e.g. IMAT format) | 1 | High barrier |
3B — Minimum academic entry requirements (6 points)
| Entry requirement level | Points |
|---|---|
| Accepts broad range of international qualifications with flexible grade requirements | 6 |
| Specific grade requirements stated but achievable for average strong student | 4 |
| High grade requirements — top 20% of cohort typical | 2 |
| Extremely competitive — documented low acceptance rate | 1 |
3C — Application process complexity (6 points)
| Application complexity | Points |
|---|---|
| Simple — under 5 required documents, online application | 6 |
| Moderate — 5 to 8 documents, some notarisation required | 4 |
| Complex — 8 to 12 documents, apostille or legalisation required | 2 |
| Very complex — over 12 documents, multiple official translations required | 1 |
Category 4 — Academic Quality
This category uses only data from internationally recognised independent third-party ranking and accreditation bodies. We do not make our own academic quality judgments in this category.
4A — QS World Ranking (4 pts)
| Score Range | Points |
|---|---|
| Top 200 | 4 |
| 201–500 | 3 |
| 501–1000 | 2 |
| Outside 1000 | 1 |
| Not ranked | 0 |
4B — QS Medicine Subject (3 pts)
| Score Range | Points |
|---|---|
| Top 100 | 3 |
| 101–200 | 2 |
| Outside 200 | 1 |
| Not ranked | 0 |
4C — WFME Accreditation (3 pts)
| Status | Points |
|---|---|
| Full accreditation | 3 |
| Recognised/in process | 1 |
| No accreditation | 0 |
Note on unranked universities: The majority of the 114 universities in our database do not appear in QS rankings. QS focuses on research-intensive universities and many strong medical schools in Eastern Europe are primarily teaching institutions. A score of 0 on QS criteria reflects absence from the ranking, not educational failure.
Category 5 — Career and Licensing Outcomes
This is the hardest category to measure because outcome data is not uniformly published. Where data is unavailable we exclude the criterion and recalculate the category score proportionally. We never estimate or infer outcome data.
| Criterion | Points | Source |
|---|---|---|
| PLAB pass rate above 80% | 4 | GMC published data |
| PLAB pass rate 60–80% | 3 | GMC published data |
| USMLE Step 1 pass rate above 80% | 3 | ECFMG published data |
| USMLE Step 1 pass rate 60–80% | 2 | ECFMG published data |
| University publishes verifiable alumni outcomes | 2 | University alumni data |
| Independent documentation of graduates in practice | 1 | GMC register, LinkedIn |
Category 6 — Language and Teaching
| Criterion | Points | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Full 6-year programme taught entirely in English | 2 | Official programme description |
| Clinical years explicitly confirmed as English-medium | 1 | Clinical year documentation |
Category 7 — Location and Lifestyle
| Criterion | Points | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Numbeo Safety Index above 60 | 1 | Numbeo Safety Index |
| Numbeo Quality of Life Index above 100 | 1 | Numbeo Quality of Life Index |
| Active international student community documented | 1 | University published statistics |
| Airport connectivity — 3+ major international hubs | 1 | Google Flights |
Category 8 — Practical and Support
| Criterion | Points | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Dedicated international student office with published contact | 1 | University website |
| Student accommodation available to international students | 1 | University accommodation page |
| Teaching hospital on-site or affiliated clinical partner | 1 | University facilities page |
Data sources — Complete list
| Source | What we use it for | URL |
|---|---|---|
| WHO World Directory of Medical Schools | Recognition — Category 1 | wdoms.org |
| EUR-Lex EU legislation database | Directive 2005/36/EC Annex V | eur-lex.europa.eu |
| General Medical Council (GMC) | GMC recognition and PLAB data | gmc-uk.org |
| ECFMG IMED database | USMLE eligibility and pass rates | ecfmg.org/imed |
| NMC India | MCI/NMC approval | nmc.org.in |
| Official university websites | Tuition, requirements, support | Individual URLs |
| Numbeo | Cost of living, safety, quality of life | numbeo.com |
| European Central Bank | Currency conversion | ecb.europa.eu |
| QS World University Rankings | Academic quality | topuniversities.com |
| WFME | Accreditation | wfme.org |
| Google Flights | Airport connectivity | flights.google.com |
Update schedule
Scores are reviewed and updated annually according to the following schedule:
| Data type | Update timing |
|---|---|
| Recognition status (WDMS, GMC, ECFMG, NMC, EU Directive) | September each year |
| Tuition fees | September each year |
| QS Rankings | Following annual publication (typically June) |
| Numbeo data | September each year |
| Outcome data (PLAB, USMLE pass rates) | When published by relevant bodies |
| University support services | September each year |
How to challenge a score
If you believe a score for any university is incorrect:
Identify the criterion
Find the specific criterion you believe is scored incorrectly
Gather your evidence
Identify the source you believe we should have used or the data we recorded incorrectly
We review every challenge within 14 days. All corrections are published in the version history.
What this methodology does not claim
It does not claim to predict student satisfaction.
Student experience is subjective and varies enormously between individuals. Our score measures objective, verifiable criteria — not whether a particular student will be happy at a particular university.
It does not claim to measure teaching quality directly.
Teaching quality inside a classroom is not measurable from public data at this level of detail. We measure proxies — accreditation, rankings where available, outcome data — but we acknowledge these are imperfect.
It does not replace a consultation.
The score is a starting point. A student with a specific academic profile, specific career goals, and specific personal circumstances will find that the right university for them is not simply the one with the highest score.
It does not evaluate universities not in our database.
We evaluate 114 universities. Absence from our database does not mean a university is poor — it may mean we have not yet evaluated it. We add universities as our evaluation capacity grows.
Version history
| Version | Date | Changes |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | Launch | Initial publication — 114 universities evaluated |
This methodology page is published under the route.doctor commitment to complete transparency. We believe independent guidance is only credible when the reasoning behind every recommendation is open to scrutiny.
route.doctor — Independent. Always.