medical definition of thesis

• Bodleian Libraries
• Oxford LibGuides
• Medical Sciences : Research Resources

Medical Sciences : Research Resources: Theses

• Journals & Proceedings
• Literature searching
• Video tutorials
• Keeping up-to-date
• Training & Guides

Introduction

Theses and dissertations are documents that present an author's research findings, which are submitted to the University in support of their academic degree. They are very useful to consult when carrying out your own research because they:

• provide a springboard to scope existing literature
• provide inspiration for the finished product
• show you the evolution of an author's ideas over time
• provide relevant and up-to-date research (for recent theses and dissertations)

On this page you will find guidance on how to search for and access theses and dissertations in the Bodleian Libraries and beyond.

Definitions

Terms you may encounter in your research.

Thesis: In the UK, a thesis is normally a document that presents an author's research findings as part of a doctoral or research programme.

Dissertation: In the UK, a dissertation is normally a document that presents an author's research findings as part of an undergraduate or master's programme.

DPhil: An abbreviation for Doctor of Philosophy, which is an advanced research qualification. You may also see it referred to as PhD.

ORA: The Oxford University Research Archive , an institutional repository for the University of Oxford's research output including digital theses.

Theses and dissertations

• Reading theses and dissertations in the Bodleian Libraries
• Non-UK theses

[Note to staff: if you choose to have a theses and dissertations page, make sure to keep this tab in this box and do not edit/delete.]

The Bodleian Libraries collection holds DPhil, MLitt and MPhil theses deposited at the University of Oxford, which you can consult. You may also be interested to read theses and dissertations beyond the University of Oxford, some of which can be read online, or you can request an inter-library loan.

Help with theses and dissertations

To find out more about how to find and access theses and dissertations in the Bodleian Libraries and beyond, we recommend the following:

• Bodleian Libraries theses and dissertations Links to information on accessing the Bodleian Libraries collections of Oxford, UK, US and other international theses.
• Oxford University Research Archive guide
• Help & guidance for digital theses Information on copyright, how to deposit your thesis in ORA and other important matters
• Guide to copyright The Bodleian Libraries' Quick guide to copyright and digital sources.

Search across 250,000+ theses for free and order full text quickly and easily.

You need to register a free account in order to download or order the full text of theses.

DART-Europe is a partnership of research libraries and library consortia who are working together to improve global access to European research theses.

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses: Global (PQDTGlobal) is the world's most comprehensive collection of full-text dissertations and theses. As the official digital dissertations archive for the Library of Congress and as the database of record for graduate research, PQDTGlobal includes millions of searchable citations to dissertations and theses from 1861 to the present day together with over a million full-text dissertations that are available for download in PDF format. Over 2.1 million titles are available for purchase as printed copies. The database offers full text for most of the dissertations added since 1997 and strong retrospective full-text coverage for older graduate works. It also includes content from PQDT UK & Ireland (aka Index to Theses) with abstracts going back to 1716.

More than 70,000 new full-text dissertations and theses are added to the database each year through dissertations publishing partnerships with 700 leading academic institutions worldwide, and collaborative retrospective digitization of dissertations. Full-text dissertations are archived as submitted by the degree-granting institution. Some will be native PDF, some PDF image.

Each dissertation published since July, 1980 includes a 350-word abstract written by the author. Master's theses published since 1988 include 150-word abstracts. Simple bibliographic citations are available for dissertations dating from 1637. Where available, PQDTGlobal provides 24-page previews of dissertations and theses.

Depositing your thesis

It is mandatory for students completing a research degree at the University of Oxford (registered to a programme of study on or after 1st October 2007) to deposit an electronic copy of their theses with the Oxford University Research Archive (ORA) in order to meet the requirements of their award. To find out more, visit the Oxford University Research Archive guide.

• << Previous: Journals & Proceedings
• Next: Literature searching >>
• Last Updated: Nov 12, 2024 4:04 PM
• URL: https://libguides.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/medsci

Website feedback

Accessibility Statement - https://visit.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/accessibility

Google Analytics - Bodleian Libraries use Google Analytics cookies on this web site. Google Analytics anonymously tracks individual visitor behaviour on this web site so that we can see how LibGuides is being used. We only use this information for monitoring and improving our websites and content for the benefit of our users (you). You can opt out of Google Analytics cookies completely (from all websites) by visiting https://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout

© Bodleian Libraries 2021. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence

• More from M-W
• To save this word, you'll need to log in. Log In

Definition of thesis

Did you know.

In high school, college, or graduate school, students often have to write a thesis on a topic in their major field of study. In many fields, a final thesis is the biggest challenge involved in getting a master's degree, and the same is true for students studying for a Ph.D. (a Ph.D. thesis is often called a dissertation ). But a thesis may also be an idea; so in the course of the paper the student may put forth several theses (notice the plural form) and attempt to prove them.

Examples of thesis in a Sentence

Word history.

in sense 3, Middle English, lowering of the voice, from Late Latin & Greek; Late Latin, from Greek, downbeat, more important part of a foot, literally, act of laying down; in other senses, Latin, from Greek, literally, act of laying down, from tithenai to put, lay down — more at do

14th century, in the meaning defined at sense 3a(1)

Dictionary Entries Near thesis

the sins of the fathers are visited upon the children

thesis novel

Cite this Entry

“Thesis.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary , Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/thesis. Accessed 22 Nov. 2024.

Kids Definition

Kids definition of thesis, more from merriam-webster on thesis.

Nglish: Translation of thesis for Spanish Speakers

Britannica English: Translation of thesis for Arabic Speakers

Britannica.com: Encyclopedia article about thesis

Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!

Can you solve 4 words at once?

Word of the day.

See Definitions and Examples »

Get Word of the Day daily email!

Popular in Grammar & Usage

How to use em dashes (—), en dashes (–) , and hyphens (-), plural and possessive names: a guide, the difference between 'i.e.' and 'e.g.', why is '-ed' sometimes pronounced at the end of a word, what's the difference between 'fascism' and 'socialism', popular in wordplay, 8 words with fascinating histories, 8 words for lesser-known musical instruments, birds say the darndest things, 10 words from taylor swift songs (merriam's version), 10 scrabble words without any vowels, games & quizzes.

• Office of the Deputy Dean
• MD Admissions Committee
• Progress Committee
• EPCC Committee Minutes
• Thesis Chair Committee
• Curriculum Mapping Documents
• PreClerkship Policies
• Clerkship & ATP Policies
• University Policy Links
• Self-Study Task Force
• You said . . . We did . . .
• Faculty Training
• Renovation & Expansion of Student Space
• Faculty Mentor Responsibilities and Resources
• Departmental Thesis Chairs
• First-Year Summer Research
• Short-term Research
• One-year Fellowships
• Travel Info & Reimbursement
• Research Didactics
• START Summer Program
• Master of Health Science
• Student Research Day
• Student Research Team
• How to Apply
• The Yale System
• Dates and Deadlines
• Pre-medical Requirements
• Admissions Team
• Creed House
• Hamburg House
• Horstmann House
• Palade House
• Slayman House
• Academic Advising
• Career Advising
• Community Building
• Performance Improvement
• Meet our Staff & Make an Appointment
• Wellness Programming: Upcoming Events
• Peer Advocate Program
• Day in the life of Med student
• The YSM Experience
• Annual Events
• Electives & Subinternships
• Staying for a Fifth Year
• Student Affairs Team
• Application Process
• International Students
• 2024-2025 Budget
• 2023-2024 Budget
• 2022-2023 Budget
• 2021-2022 Budget
• 2020-2021 Budget
• 2019-2020 Budget
• 2018-2019 Budget
• 2017-2018 Budget
• 2016-2017 Budget
• 2015-2016 Budget
• 2014-2015 Budget
• Research Funding, Extended Study and Financial Aid
• Frequently Asked Questions
• PA Online Student Budget
• FAFSA Application
• CSS Profile Application
• How to Avoid Common Errors
• Student Billing Information
• Financial Literacy Information
• External Scholarships
• Financial Aid Team
• Certificate in Global Medicine
• Topics in Global Medicine and Health
• Global Health Seminar
• Summer Research Abroad
• Electives at Other Yale Graduate Schools
• About the Course
• South Africa
• Connecticut
• Dominican Republic
• Lectures, Series, & Conferences
• Community & Advocacy Opportunities
• Faculty Advisors & Mentors
• Global Health Team
• Services & Facilities
• Program & Faculty Development
• Education & Research
• Simulated Participants
• Year in Review
• Faculty & Staff
• Advisory Board
• HAVEN Free Clinic
• Neighborhood Health Project
• Humanities in Medicine
• Biomedical Ethics
• Yale Journal of Biology & Medicine
• University Engagement Opportunities
• Community Engagement Opportunities
• Competencies
• Guiding Principles
• Graduation Requirements
• Year 1 Curriculum
• Year 2 Curriculum
• Introduction to the Profession (iPro)
• Scientific Foundations
• Genes and Development
• Attacks and Defenses
• Homeostasis
• Energy and Metabolism
• Connection to the World
• Across the Lifespan
• Professional Responsibility
• Scientific Inquiry
• Populations & Methods
• Biochemistry
• Cell Biology
• Diagnostic Methods
• Domains of the Health Equity Thread
• Advisory Group
• Pharmacology
• Communications Skills
• Clinical Reasoning
• Palliative Care
• Physical Examination
• Point of Care Ultrasound
• Early Clinical Experiences
• Emergency Medicine
• Primary Care
• Internal Medicine
• Recommended Readings
• Online Learning
• Interprofessional Educational
• Anesthesiology
• Child Study Center
• Clinical Longitudinal Elective
• Definitions
• Dermatology
• Diagnostic Imaging
• Family Medicine
• Interventional Radiology
• Laboratory Medicine
• Neurosurgery
• Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences
• Ophthalmology and Visual Science
• Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation
• Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
• Therapeutic Radiology
• Elective Dates
• WEC Faculty
• Non-Clinical Electives
• Coaching Program
• Patient-Centered Language
• Race & Ethnicity
• Sex & Gender
• Full Glossary of Terms
• About The Inclusive Language Initiative
• Glossary Bibliography
• Curriculum Team
• Visiting Student Scholarship Program
• International Student FAQs

INFORMATION FOR

• Residents & Fellows
• Researchers

Formal MD Thesis Requirement

All students at Yale School of Medicine engage in research and are required to write an MD thesis during medical school. The only exceptions are students who have earned a PhD degree in the health sciences before matriculation and students enrolled in Yale’s MD-PhD program. The YSM MD Thesis is under the governance of the EPCC, which meets regularly to recommend rules, regulations, and deadlines.

Students should review the 2024-2025 Research Guide for Students , known as the Thesis Guide, for all information pertaining to the YSM thesis and associated processes and deadlines.

Deadlines/Important Dates

Thesis approval process, thesis prizes, required formatting and components of the md thesis, examples for reference section formatting, avoiding the risk of copyright violation when submitting the md thesis, thesis deadlines for the 2024-2025 academic year, md students:.

The Office of Student Research has worked with the Dean’s Office and other educational stakeholders to establish deadlines for theses submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation in May 2025. The deadlines ensure that students have sufficient time to complete their theses and that there is sufficient time for rigorous assessment and revision before final approval. These deadlines are strictly followed. Students are strongly encouraged to submit their theses well before the Class of 2025 Thesis Deadlines provided below. This timeline provides students, mentors/advisors, and sponsoring departments sufficient time for useful review and revision. It should be recognized by all concerned that the integrity of the thesis requirement and effective, rigorous review requires adherence to these deadlines. OSR will hold periodic Zoom “Class of 2025 Thesis Check-in Sessions” and will distribute reminder emails with more detailed instructions as these deadlines approach.

*Students missing the August 22nd, January 17th, and/or March 28th deadlines will be referred to the Progress Committee to ensure they receive adequate support to make progress towards this graduation requirement. Students missing the January 17th and/or March 28th deadlines will be ineligible for thesis prizes at graduation .

Extensions beyond the above thesis deadlines will be granted only for special circumstances and must have the approval of the student’s thesis mentor/advisor, Head of Advisory College, and the Departmental Thesis Chairperson . Students seeking an extension for the January 17, 2025, deadline must submit a Thesis Deadline Extension Request Form to their Head of Advisory College, and the Departmental Thesis Chairperson, for approval. Extensions, if granted, are granted in 2-week increments. An OSR staff member will confirm that an extension for the student has been received and will provide an updated timetable of deadlines that the student must adhere to. If a student is unable to meet the extended deadline for thesis submission, they must submit a new Thesis Deadline Extension Request Form following the same process listed above. A new Thesis Deadline Extension Request Form is required for each 2-week extension period. In the event of an extension, if granted, the following ABSOLUTE Class of 2025 Thesis Extension Deadlines will apply:

*All late theses require an extension. The student must submit the Thesis Deadline Extension Request Form by January 17, 2025, at 5 pm.

MD/MHS Students:

Consistent with degree requirements, MD-MHS students must present their thesis to their three-person committee prior to the January 17th deadline. Students are encouraged to start arranging the date of this committee meeting in the fall to avoid unanticipated delays. The MD-MHS process will be tracked in Medtrics.

*Students missing the August 22nd, January 17th, and/or March 28th deadlines will be referred to the Progress Committee to ensure they receive adequate support to make progress towards this graduation requirement. Students missing the January 17th and/or March 28th deadlines will be ineligible for thesis prizes at graduation.

MD-PhD Students:

A different process applies to students in the MD-PhD program. For students enrolled in the combined MD-PhD Program, the dissertation submitted to and approved by the Graduate School will satisfy the MD thesis requirement. Therefore, MD-PhD students who have already defended their dissertation and received their PhD should provide this information to OSR via Medtrics.

To ensure compliance with YSM graduation deadlines, MD-PhD students in the class of 2025 who have not defended and submitted their dissertation to the Graduate School by the October 1, 2024, deadline will be required to submit a copy of their dissertation directly to the OSR in order to fulfill the MD thesis requirement. Further instructions and deadlines will be provided in the fall of 2024. Please note that MD-PhD students must also defend and submit their dissertation to the Graduate School no later than March 15, 2025, to meet the Graduate School spring degree deadline for conferral of the PhD degree. MD-PhD students who have not yet defended their dissertation should provide this information to OSR via Medtrics. If there are any questions about the process, please contact the MD-PhD Office.

Financial support is not provided for writing the thesis.

Thesis Preparation and Approval

Preparation for thesis submission begins in the summer of the fourth year. At this time, timeline and practices are posted to the OSR website, distributed via email, and reviewed with students in class meetings. Because thesis approval is a lengthy process involving three levels of review, students are encouraged to manage their time well and start writing their first draft early in the fall semester of their final year of medical school. The thesis approval process will be tracked in Medtrics.

July: OSR website is updated, thesis deadlines are distributed via email to all students in the graduating class, and an informational session is held. Students should be on track to complete their thesis research by early-fall. Any student anticipating a challenge in this regard should contact the OSR as soon as possible. By mid-August, all students expecting to graduate in May must submit their tentative thesis title and thesis mentor/advisor through Medtrics. The OSR will contact all thesis mentors/advisors to confirm this role and to provide information and expectations regarding the thesis process. Therefore, students should confirm the faculty member’s willingness to serve as thesis mentor. Students missing this deadline, or whose mentors/advisors express concern regarding the student’s progress, will be referred to the Progress Committee to ensure adequate support for this graduation requirements.

August – December: Students should finalize research and draft their thesis. As the semester progresses, activities should shift from the data generation/analysis to thesis writing. Students should do their best to complete the first draft of the thesis by mid-late December. Because students are also involved in the residency application and interview process, they are discouraged from starting new projects at this time.

December – January: This period is devoted to reviewing and editing of the thesis draft that is ultimately approved by the faculty thesis mentor/advisor and submitted by the student to the Thesis Chair of their sponsoring department. The YSM faculty thesis mentor/advisor will be asked to complete a thesis assessment that evaluates the student’s performance on YSM’s research-related educational objectives and provides formative summative feedback via Medtrics.

January – March: The Departmental Thesis Chair coordinates thesis review by external reviewers. An “external reviewer” is defined as an individual who is not directly involved in the project. This individual may be a Yale faculty member internal/external to YSM or may hold a faculty appointment at an outside institution. This reviewer reads the thesis, completes the assessment, provides formative summative feedback, and makes recommendations for any required changes to the thesis. Departmental Thesis Chairs review assessments and transmit thesis approvals to the OSR. These assessments and approvals will be managed via Medtrics.

March: Theses and their associated assessments undergo school-level review by the OSR. Students receive YSM approval of their thesis along with summative feedback obtained during the review process. Students incorporate any required changes into their thesis and upload to the Yale Medicine Digital Thesis Library/Eli Scholar via the ProQuest platform.

April: The OSR confirms that theses have been deposited into the Yale Medicine Digital Thesis Library and the YSM registrar receives the names of students who have completed the thesis requirement.

The central role of the medical student thesis is to assess student’s performance on the YSM’s research-related educational program objectives. As such, all students are expected to produce an excellent piece of scholarly work. In recognition of these achievements, the OSR has worked to develop an award process that celebrates the outstanding research done by YSM students without creating a competitive atmosphere. Hence, thesis awards are based on milestone-based assessments submitted by thesis mentors/advisors and reviewers during the approval process, and internal review of the final thesis that was deposited into the Yale Medicine Digital Thesis Library. Consistent with all other graduation prizes, YSM MD Thesis Awards will remain confidential until they are announced in the YSM Commencement Program on May 19, 2025. While some departments may elect to confer thesis “honors” based upon their own internal review, this recognition is distinct from YSM graduation prizes and is not under OSR’s purview.

Read about the required formatting and components for the thesis .

See helpful examples for reference section formatting.

Read about avoiding the risk of copyright violation when submitting the MD Thesis.

2024-2025 Research Guide for Students

Apply for a thesis extension.

• Melbourne Medical School
• Our Departments
• Medical Education

Writing a thesis

A thesis is a written report of your research, and generally contains the following chapters: introduction, methods, results, discussion and conclusion. It will also have a list of references and appendices. Check with your faculty/department/school for degree-specific thesis requirements. You may also find it helpful to look at published theses (in your department) to see how they are structured. (Internationally, the ‘thesis’ may be referred to as a ‘dissertation’).

• Gruba, P., & Zobel, J. (2014). How to write a better minor thesis . Melbourne, Australia: Melbourne University Publishing.
• Stoddart, K. (1991) Writing Sociologically: A Note on Teaching the Construction of a Qualitative Report. Teaching Sociology (2), 243-248.
• Mullins, G. and M. Kiley (2002). It’s a PhD, not a Nobel Prize: how experienced examiners assess research theses. Studies in Higher Education . 27(2): 369-386 .
• Thesis Bootcamp
• Shut Up and Write Sessions
• Study Skills workshops (including Word for Thesis and Introduction to NVivo workshops).

• TheFreeDictionary
• Word / Article
• Starts with
• Free toolbar & extensions
• Word of the Day
• Free content

the·sis

The·ses.

• catastrophism
• central dogma
• conal growth hypothesis
• Doctor of Medicine
• enthesopathy
• gray literature
• Grey Literature
• humoral pathology
• pharmacography
• reversibility principle
• semiography
• thermostable
• thermostable enzyme
• thermostable opsonin test
• thermostasis
• Thermo-STAT system
• thermosteresis
• thermostromuhr
• thermosystaltic
• thermosystaltism
• thermotactic
• thermotaxis
• thermotherapy
• Thermotogales
• thermotonometer
• thermotropism
• Thermus rehai
• thesaurismosis
• thesaurismotic
• thesaurosis
• theta antigen
• theta pointu alternant pattern
• theta rhythm
• theta waves
• Thevenard, Andre
• Thevetia peruviana
• Thezac-Porsmeur method
• thiabendazole
• thiamin chloride unit
• thiamin deficiency
• thiamin hydrochloride
• thiamin hydrochloride unit
• thiamin mononitrate
• thiamin pyridinylase
• thiamin pyrophosphate
• These Four Walls
• these games of cat and mouse
• These Games of Ours
• These Guys Know
• these horse-and-buggy solution
• These Last Days Ministries
• these little white lies
• these meat and potatoes issues
• these meat-and-potatoes issues
• These New Puritans
• these poor devils
• these things are sent to try us
• these things happen
• These Things Take Time
• these turn up like a bad penny
• these turn up like bad pennies
• These Twain
• these unmitigated disaster
• these ups and downs
• these were tailor made
• these were tailor-made
• these white lies
• these words of wisdom
• Thèses En Ligne
• Theseus and Pirithoüs
• Thesiger, Wilfred (Patrick)
• Thesis (academic)
• Thesis defence
• Thesis, Rule, Explanation, Analysis, Thesis
• Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis
• Thesmophoria
• Thesmophoros
• Facebook Share

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Medical dissertation basics: analysis of a course of study for medical students

Basics zur medizinischen dissertation: analyse eines kursangebots für promovierende in der medizin, sophia griegel, michael kühl, achim schneider, susanne j kühl.

• Author information
• Article notes
• Copyright and License information

*To whom correspondence should be addressed: Susanne J. Kühl, University of Ulm, Medical Faculty, Institute for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Albert-Einstein-Allee 11, D-89081 Ulm, Germany, E-mail: [email protected]

Received 2021 Sep 21; Accepted 2022 Feb 9; Revised 2021 Dec 2; Collection date 2022.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. See license information at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Background:

Although the majority of medical students in Germany pursue a doctorate, only a portion of them receive a standardized scientific training, which is reflected in the quality issues seen in medical doctoral theses. The course Medical Dissertation Basics was conceptualized and scientifically monitored in order to support medical doctoral students on the one hand and to improve the quality of their scientific work on the other.

Methodology:

The course consists of three modules. Module I, which is an introductory module, covers time and writing management and addresses how to approach literature and the principles of scientific work as well as the chapters required in a dissertation and the dissertation presentation and defense. In the practical module II, doctoral students write sections of their dissertation chapters and receive feedback via peer and expert reviews. Module III includes training on dissertation presentations and their defense. For objective analysis purposes, a multiple-choice test was administered before and after module I. Medical students from semesters 2 to 6 served as a control group. Questionnaires were used to subjectively analyze the training and support functions of modules I-III.

High participation rates and the fact that the modules were taught numerous times show that doctoral students accept the courses. The objective analysis of module I showed a highly significant knowledge acquisition of the course group (N=55) in contrast to the control group (N=34). The doctoral students rated the course modules I-III with grades between 1.0 and 1.25 (grade A+/A; N=20-65 SD=0-0.44), felt well supported and estimated their learning success as high.

Conclusion:

The study indicates knowledge acquisition in module I and a high doctoral student satisfaction with all modules. For an objective analysis of modules II-III, a comparison of completed doctoral theses (course participants vs. non-participants) would be appropriate but would only make sense in a few years. Based on the results of our study, we recommend that other faculties implement similar courses.

Keywords: dissertation, doctoral thesis, scientific curriculum, doctoral supervision, scientific competency development, online teaching

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund:.

Obwohl die Mehrheit der Medizinstudierenden in Deutschland promoviert, erfährt nur eine Minderheit eine standardisierte wissenschaftliche Ausbildung, was sich an Qualitätsmängeln medizinischer Promotionsarbeiten äußert. Um Promovierenden der Medizin einerseits eine Unterstützung zu geben und andererseits die Qualität ihrer wissenschaftlichen Arbeiten zu verbessern, wurde das Kursangebot Basics zur medizinischen Dissertation konzeptioniert und wissenschaftlich begleitet.

Das Kursangebot besteht aus drei Modulen. Modul I als Grundlagenkurs behandelt neben dem Zeit- und Schreibmanagement, dem Umgang mit Literatur und den Grundsätzen des wissenschaftlichen Arbeitens auch die Kapitelinhalte einer Dissertationsschrift sowie die Präsentation und Verteidigung. Im praktischen Modul II verfassen Promovierende Auszüge von Dissertationskapiteln und erhalten über Peer- und Experten-Begutachtungen Feedback. Modul III umfasst das Training von Promotionsvorträgen und deren Verteidigung. Zur objektiven Analyse wurde ein Multiple Choice Test vor und nach Modul I durchgeführt. Medizinstudierende aus Fachsemester 2 bis 6 dienten als Kontrollgruppe. Anhand von Fragebögen wurden alle Kursmodule I-III hinsichtlich ihrer Ausbildungs- und Unterstützungsfunktion subjektiv analysiert.

Ergebnisse:

Hohe Teilnahmezahlen und die vielfache Durchführung der Kursmodule zeigen, dass Promovierende die Kurse akzeptieren. Die objektive Analyse von Modul I ergab einen hoch signifikanten Wissenserwerb der Kursgruppe (N=55) im Gegensatz zur Kontrollgruppe (N=34). Die Promovierenden bewerteten die Kursmodule I-III mit Schulnoten zwischen 1,0 und 1,25 (N=20-65 SD=0-0,44), fühlten sich gut unterstützt und schätzten ihren Lernerfolg als hoch ein.

Schlussfolgerung:

Die Studie zeigt eine hohe Promovierenden-Zufriedenheit mit allen Modulen und einen Wissenserwerb durch das Modul I. Zur objektiven Analyse von Modul II-III bietet sich ein Vergleich der fertiggestellten Promotionsarbeiten (Kurs Teilnehmende vs. Nicht-Teilnehmende) an, welcher erst in ein paar Jahren sinnvoll ist. Durch die Ergebnisse unserer Studie empfehlen wir anderen Fakultäten die Implementierung ähnlicher Angebote.

1. Introduction

1.1. the problem.

Between 54 to 70 percent of all medical students successfully complete their doctorates while about one-third of them do not [ 1 ], [ 2 ], [ 3 ], [ 4 ]. On the one hand, this indicates a very high willingness to do a doctorate, but on the other, that the doctoral students are often unsuccessful [ 5 ], [ 6 ]. What is special about the study of medicine is that the doctorate can be started while the medical degree is being pursued. This promises an initial motivation since it saves time, but it often leads to a double burden [ 5 ], [ 7 ], [ 8 ]. Another issue is an insufficient basic scientific education as well as a lack of supervision of doctoral candidates [ 9 ]. The quality of medical doctorates is also being criticized at the scientific and socio-political level. Thus, negative catch phrases such as title research and after-work research reflect the bad reputation of medical doctorates [ 8 ].

While there is a high demand for good scientific education by doctoral students and a high demand for quality from the scientific and societal side, there is often a lack of course offerings in this regard. In recent years, the global standards of medical education of the WFME (World Federation for Medical Education), the Medizinstudium 2020 (medical studies 2020) master plan and the Wissenschaftsrat (German council of science and humanities) have called for a strengthening of the scientific education. Individual German medical faculties have responded to this and implemented scientific course concepts [ 4 ], [ 8 ], [ 10 ], [ 11 ], [ 12 ], [ 13 ], [ 14 ], [ 15 ], [ 16 ] as well as quality assurance measures, which were documented in a study of the University Alliance for Young Scientists [ 17 ]. While subjective student evaluations are available, objective analyses of such doctoral courses are still lacking [ 16 ].

1.2. Initial situation at the medical faculty of the university of Ulm

The official curriculum of the medical faculty of the university of Ulm includes scientific content from the subjects of biometry and epidemiology (semester 7). In addition to evidence-based medicine, various types of research including the planning, methodology and implementation as well as the application of statistical tests are covered. Scientific content is also taught in other events that are included in a longitudinal mosaic curriculum (wise@ulm).

In addition, the University of Ulm offers electives for doctoral students: The experimental medicine course of study introduced in 2005, for example, is a doctoral program for medical students that requires an experimental dissertation. Each year, approximately 35 students are selected with the help of an application and selection process. The support provided consists of professional and scientific supervision, various scientific events, the completion of elective courses and ten months of financial support [ 18 ].

The course Fit für die diss MED (Fit for the medical dissertation), offered by the communication and information center, is a voluntary course made available to medical students at the university of Ulm. The course, which includes a total of eight hours and is mainly theoretical, covers successful publishing, the scientific framework and the use of computer programs. The content of the medical dissertation chapters is only marginally discussed.

There is no course offered for doctoral medical students that deals intensively with good scientific practice and the chapter content required for a doctoral thesis. Practical support during the writing process and in preparation for the presentation and defense of a dissertation has been limited as well. Thus, the course “medical dissertation basics: how to write scientific texts and present a doctoral thesis” with a total of three modules (MED I-III) was implemented in 2018, has been taught numerous times since then and has been monitored scientifically.

This raises the following questions:

Is the Basics MED course with its three modules I-III accepted by students obtaining a doctorate in medicine?

Can the participation in MED I (module I) result in an acquisition of knowledge by students obtaining a doctorate in medicine?

How do students obtaining a doctorate in medicine rate the support provided and the scientific content learned during the three modules MED I-III?

2.1. Course concept

The course offering “Medical dissertation basics: How to write scientific texts and present a doctoral thesis” (MED I-III) was developed and introduced in 2018. Module I covers scientific fundamentals and teaches the content required for a medical doctoral thesis. Module II teaches students how to write high-quality text. Module III trains students on how to present and defend a doctoral thesis. The sequence of the modules (I → II → III) is based on the chronology of the medical doctoral process and permits students to apply the theoretical content learned (module I) to their own doctorate with the help of practical assignments (module II-III). The course content is based on the official guidelines of the medical faculty of the university of Ulm, observations gathered during the supervision of medical doctoral theses and courses that are already being offered at other universities [ 9 ], [ 11 ], [ 15 ], [ 16 ].

2.1.1. Participation information

The course is offered to doctoral students of human and dental medicine. In some cases, students from other degree programs may participate as well.

Students may take modules I and III as needed. Module I is a prerequisite for module II. The online courses are offered on the Ulm Moodle platform. Modules I and III are offered 3-5 times a year depending on demand while module II is offered throughout the year.

2.1.2. MED I (module I)

Module I is offered to students shortly before or at the beginning of the doctorate program as a one-week online course (nine hours in total). In order to structure the content, eight teaching phases (15 min to 2 hours each) have been defined as either independent study phases or classroom phases (online meetings).

In the (independent study) phase 1, students are introduced to scientific practice as well as time and writing management with the help of instructional videos, PDF files and worksheets. In the (classroom) phase 2, the instructor lectures on good scientific practice, the development of a comprehensible manuscript and its introduction. The remaining phases cover the legal framework, the scientific question or hypothesis, literature research and management (optional) and the remaining chapters of a dissertation as well as the presentation and defense of a dissertation (see figure 1 (Fig. 1) , part A).

Figure 1. Point A-C: Course concepts with analyses of MED I-III (Module I-III).

A. Course organization (phases 1-8), content and materials of MED I, mandatory participation in pre-tests and post-tests (objective analysis), voluntary participation in evaluations (subjective analysis). B. Course organization, sequence and content (assignments with text length) of MED II, voluntary participation in evaluations. C. Course organization, sequence and content of MED III, voluntary participation in evaluations. Abbreviation: MED: Medical Experimental Dissertation Basics.

2.1.3. MED II (module II)

The online module II is designed for doctoral students who have already taken MED I and have started writing their dissertation. Students may participate individually or as a group of two. The assignments require students to write three to four sections of their own dissertation (see figure 1 (Fig. 1) , part B): Excerpt from the laboratory book (writing assignment 1), the materials and methods section (written assignment 2), excerpt of the introduction or discussion (written assignment 3) and excerpt of the results section (written assignment 4). These sections are first subjected to a peer review (feedback from another student) and then to an expert review (from the instructor). For both reviews, a semi-standardized feedback form is used, which was developed by two experts and reviewed by the academic staff members of our working group. If necessary, the doctoral students must submit a revised draft of a given section upon having received their feedback.

2.1.4. MED III (module III)

Module III trains students to present and defend their dissertations. In an individual preparation phase, students prepare a 7-minute presentation of their dissertation and are required to use a brief guideline. The students make their presentations in front of a small group (three to six doctoral students) during a first (online) class. Each presentation is followed by an approximately 30-minute feedback portion (feedback offered by the small group and the instructor) using a customized, semi-standardized feedback form, which was developed in the same manner as the feedback form used in module II. In a revision phase, the presentations are revised and presented again during a second (online) class. Students are provided with further feedback and collect and discuss potential questions such as those that an examination committee might present in order to practice the defense portion of the dissertation (see figure 1 (Fig. 1) , part C).

2.2. Study design for the analysis of the course offered (modules I-III)

The MED course study was divided into an objective analysis of the first module and subjective analyses of all modules (I-III).

For the objective analysis of the first module, a multiple choice (MC) knowledge test was developed and used as part of the courses offered from June to October 2020. Since module I was offered three times during this period, there were three test cycles. The test subjects consisted of the participants of module I (course group) and a control group. The selection of the individuals in the control group was subject to the following conditions: They had to be students of human medicine from the semesters 2-6 who had not yet started their doctoral thesis.

The subjective analysis of module I was based on the voluntary student evaluations from June 2020 to July 2021 (N=65). The subjective analyses of module II (N=20) and module III (N=20) were based on the evaluations from 2018 to 2021.

2.2.1. Objective analysis of the knowledge acquisition (module I)

To assess the knowledge acquired due to a participation in MED I (module I), 19 multiple choice questions were developed. In a second step, the test design was reviewed by two experts. Volunteers from our work group (N=7) performed a pretest in a third step [ 19 ], [ 20 ] and provided feedback about unclear or misleading wording and completion time.

The final test, consisting of eleven A positive type questions (choose one correct answer out of five possible answers) and eight K Prim type questions (choose multiple correct answers out of five possible answers), was administered via the Ulm learning platform Moodle. The knowledge test was administered three days before (pre-test) and three days after (post-test) the course (completion time: max. 20 minutes). Although the same questions were used for the pre-test and post-test, the order of the questions and answers was changed. Participants in the control group were asked to not research the content related to the questions over the course of the study.

With regard to eight K Prim type questions, the number of correct answer options varied (from 2 to 5). If an answer option was correctly selected, one point was awarded so that a maximum of 5 points could be achieved for each K Prim question. Points were deducted for incorrectly selected distractors. The point deduction principle was applied equally to all questions (type A positive and K Prim ). Consequently, a total score of minus 30 to plus 32 points was possible.

2.2.2. Subjective analysis through student evaluations (modules I-III).

For the subjective analysis, semi-standardized questionnaires were developed for all modules. In addition to the socio-demographic data of the participants, data on general and content-related course aspects was collected (e.g., the organization, structure and subjectively perceived learning success; see figure 2 (Fig. 2) , figure 3 (Fig. 3) and figure 4 (Fig. 4) ), which were assessed with a Likert-type response scale (1=do not agree at all to 6=agree completely). Participants were able to enter praise, criticism or suggestions for improvement in a free text field. The overall module was also evaluated by using a school grade (1=very good, 6=insufficient).

Figure 2. Results from the student evaluations of MED I (Module I).

A. General questions about the course. B. Students' assessment of the individually perceived learning success; Likert scale: from 1= "strongly disagree" to 6= "strongly agree". N=65.

Figure 3. Results from the student evaluations of MED II (Module II).

A. General questions about the course. B. Students‘ assessment of the individually perceived learning success; Likert scale: from 1= “strongly disagree” to 6= “strongly agree”. N=20.

Figure 4. Results from the student evaluations of MED III (Module III).

2.3. Data analysis and statistics

All analyses were performed using the SPSS Statistics Version 26 software from the International Business Machines Corporation. For the knowledge test, the total scores of all three test cycles were calculated. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test did not show a normal distribution of the data, so the nonparametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test for connected samples was used for analysis purposes. An alpha level of 5% was applied. Free-text comments were categorized and quantified according to praise, criticism or suggestion for improvement, following Schneider et al., 2019 [ 21 ].

2.4. Ethics

The ethics committee of the University of Ulm did not consider an ethics vote necessary. The participation in the questionnaires and tests was voluntary, anonymous and free of charge. The participants' consent to data processing and data transfer was obtained.

3.1. Participation figures

A total of 171 doctoral students participated in MED I (which was offered six times between July 2020 and November 2021), 21 students participated in MED II (since 2018) and 25 students participated in MED III (which was offered nine times since 2018). The number of participants in the course-related studies was somewhat lower (see figure 1 (Fig. 1) and table 1 (Tab. 1) ).

Table 1. Sociodemographic data from student evaluations of MED I-III in mean +/- standard deviation or in percent %; N=number of evaluators.

3.2. Objective analysis of MED I

3.2.1. sociodemographic data of the course and control groups.

The socio-demographic data of the course group was obtained from the evaluation forms (section 2.2.2) and data of the control group was based on verbal information provided by the participants.

Of the module I participants, 89% studied human medicine (N=65, see table 1 (Tab. 1) ) compared to 100% of control group subjects (N=34). The majority of course participants were female (71%); in the control group, male subjects dominated with 62%. The course participants were on average in semester 7.67 (SD=1.66) while the subjects of the control group were in semester 4.76 (SD=1.35).

3.2.2. Results from the knowledge test

To test for knowledge acquisition in MED I, the results from the pre-test and post-test were compared (see figure 5 (Fig. 5) ). The result of the control group remained unchanged with a median of 10.5 points (Q1=5.75 Q3=13) in the pre-test and post-test. Only the dispersion decreased slightly in the post-test. In contrast, the course group showed a significant knowledge acquisition with a median of 13 points in the pre-test (Q1=11 Q3=17.5) and 22 points in the post-test (Q1=19.5 Q3=25) (p<0.001).

Figure 5. Results from the knowledge test of MED I (Module I) in a boxplot diagram, comparison of test results (pre-test and post-test) of the control group and the course group from three test cycles (June 2020 - October 2020), maximum total score=32 points, negative results possible as well due to a point deduction for wrong answers. Abbreviations: N=subjects of the control group/course group, p-value ***p=0.001; n.s., not significant.

3.3. Subjective analyses of MED I-III

3.3.1. sociodemographic data.

The sociodemographic data of the participants (see table 1 (Tab. 1) ) shows that the age and semester of study increased from module I to III. Dental and human medical students who had not yet started or had already started their experimental/clinical/retrospective/teaching research participated in Module I. Module groups II and III included human medicine students who were primarily doing experimental work. A large proportion of doctoral students from the experimental medicine student track participated in all modules [ 18 ].

3.3.2. Subjective evaluation results

MED I was rated on average with the school grade 1.21 (N=58 SD=0.41), MED II with 1.28 (N=18 SD=0.46) and MED III with the grade 1.0 (N=20 SD=0.00). Additional questions tried to determine how students obtaining a doctorate in medicine assess the support and their learning success in the courses.

3.3.3. Evaluation results for module I

The communication of the general course information (MW=5.80, SD=0.44), the organization and overall structure, and the teaching by the instructor were rated particularly positively. The presentation of data and the literature research (MW=4.74, SD=1.02) scored somewhat worse. The teaching of scientific content such as literature management (MW=5.35, SD=1.16) and the teaching of the chapter content required for a dissertation, led to a subjectively perceived high learning success (see figure 2). Similar results were reflected by the praise expressed in the free text questions in which the course content, the commitment of the instructors and the teaching videos were positively emphasized (see table 2 (Tab. 2) ).

Table 2. Exemplary free texts for the question: “Criticism/praise/suggestion for improvement” from the student evaluations of MED I-III, N=overall number of free texts, n=number of specific comments (praise/criticism/suggestion for improvement).

3.3.4. Evaluation results for module II

General aspects such as the basic structure, the assignments and the feedback by the instructor (MW=5.80, SD=0.41) were rated good to very good. The peer feedback by fellow students was rated somewhat lower (MW=3.91, SD=1.38). The participants indicated that their writing process had improved (MW=5.55, SD=0.89). Students rated the drafting of the materials and methods section, the introduction or discussion and the results section as particularly instructive and the lab journal entry as (somewhat) instructive (MW=4.60, SD=1.19) (see figure 3 (Fig. 3) ). Two students commented on being able to do without the lab book excerpt while others suggested the option of submitting more dissertation sections. The positive comments made up 60% of all comments and included references to the speedy correction and individual feedback provided by the instructor (see table 2 (Tab. 2) ).

3.3.5. Evaluation results for module III

MED III, which pertains to the presentation and defense of a dissertation, was characterized by very high student satisfaction. Organizational and structural aspects, the ability to present two times, the analyses and feedback by the instructor were rated very good (MW=6.00, SD=0.00). All students would take the course again (MW=6.00, SD=0.00). Participants rated the learning success pertaining to the general presentation, content and structure of a lecture and the use of media for visualization purposes very highly (see figure 4 (Fig. 4) ). In the free texts, the commitment of the instructors in the course design was rated positively. The participants felt that the module provided structure as well as new perspectives and well prepared them for the presentation and defense of their dissertation. Some participants would have liked more basic information on how to give a good presentation (see table 2 (Tab. 2) ).

4. Discussion

Our study shows that

all modules of the Basics MED course are accepted by students obtaining a doctorate in medicine.

participation in MED I (module I) leads to a knowledge acquisition by the students obtaining a doctorate in medicine.

students obtaining a doctorate in medicine highly rate the support and learning success of scientific content provided in the course modules MED I-III.

4.1. Basics MED courses accepted by doctoral students in medicine

At the time the course was implemented, other doctoral programs had already been established at the University of Ulm [ 18 ]. Therefore, despite a high demand for doctoral programs throughout Germany, we were interested in whether the course would be accepted [ 9 ], [ 13 ]. We were able to confirm this based on the number of times the course has been conducted (several times a year) and high participation numbers. The participation figures for Modules II and III were somewhat lower. Possible reasons are that modules II-III become relevant in the later couese of the dissertation (possibly not until later) and the additional time required. For module II, students had to have first completed module I, and continuous texts had to be drafted. In contrast to a scientific term paper (doctoral program at the Charité Berlin), these continuous texts are only excerpts of the student's dissertation, which relativizes the additional effort [ 15 ].

4.2. Participation in MED I (Module I) results in knowledge acquisition

To test the degree to which students learned from module I, an MC test was designed and administered before and after the course (pre-test and post-test). It showed a significant knowledge acquisition by the course group compared to the control group. The purpose of the control group was to test for factors that might influence the test results, such as a practice effect due to the test being administered twice [ 22 ], and jeopardize their validity. We used identical questions in the pre-test and the post-test and only changed the order, which, according to Golda et al., has no significant influence on the level of difficulty [ 23 ].

Due to insignificant differences in the test scores of the control group, a practice effect can be largely ruled out, indicating an objective knowledge acquisition of the course group.

4.3. Doctoral students rate the support and learning success highly

Our subjective analyses show that students considered the basics MED modules I-III as helpful for their doctoral studies. The participants rated the learning gain relating to scientific content high. The learning gain relating to literature research (and management) was insignificantly lower. One reason could be the complexity of the topic, which is difficult to grasp in a 9-hour course. The ability to manage literature is often acquired over a longer period of time, such as the entire doctoral period [ 13 ]. In the evaluation of MED II, the feedback by the instructor was rated more helpful than the peer feedback provided by fellow students (see figure 3 (Fig. 3) ). Examples from the literature show that students can generally benefit from a feedback culture (including peer feedback) [ 24 ], [ 25 ]. Doctoral students are at the beginning of their academic career and have yet to develop a critical eye for academic texts. This process is positively supported by the involvement in peer feedback.

Individual participants rated the relevance of the laboratory book excerpt as low. The Wissenschaftsrat and the instructors believe that this portion of the module is very relevant for ensuring scientific standards [ 12 ].

Overall, however, the results at the subjective level are consistent with calls (by the Wissenschaftsrat, WFME, etc.) for more intensive support and scientific training [ 11 ], [ 12 ]. Studies evaluating other doctoral programs have resulted in similar conclusions [ 15 ], [ 16 ].

4.4. Limitations

The limiting factor of the knowledge test relating to module I is that only MC questions were used. Unlike open-ended question formats, it is possible that MC questions are answered correctly not due to sound knowledge but rather because students recognize key words [26]. On the other hand, this type of question is commonly used in exams and allows for a standardized and quantitative evaluation [ 26 ].

In addition, the course group included students who were on the perennial experimental medicine study track. It is possible, albeit unlikely, that the doctoral program may influence the test results, but this cannot be ruled out. Other limitations include differences in the test groups: The majority of the course participants had already started their doctorate while the control group had not (yet) started. Since many doctoral students of the Medical Faculty had already taken MED I, the number of doctoral students suitable for the control group was limited. Furthermore, there was a lack of data (e.g., e-mail addresses) for a targeted search for subjects. Therefore, we chose medical students from semesters 2-6 who were younger on average and were not yet pursuing their doctorate and with whom we had had contact in other courses. We received more feedback from male subjects, resulting in a different gender distribution between course and control subjects. In addition, the control group did not include any participants from the Experimental Medicine study track. This is due to the fact that almost all of the 35 participants who had just received funding during the study period took part in MED I because the Experimental Medicine study track accepts the MED modules as electives [18].

Another approach to determine whether the knowledge increase was due to the course would be to test content that was not covered in the course. However, additional questions would have led to an increase in processing time, which might have decreased the willingness to participate in the study.

In addition to uncertain objectivity and validity, another limitation of voluntary evaluations is that they are conducted online [ 27 ]. Online evaluations can be perceived as more anonymous than face-to-face surveys [ 28 ]. Without a tangible expectation from the instructors present, the response rate may have been lower. Advantages of more anonymous (online) surveys, however, are more honest expressions, especially of criticism, which are valuable for the further development of a course [ 28 ], [ 29 ].

5. Summary and outlook

Our study allows for both an objective and subjective analysis of a course designed to support students obtaining a doctorate in medicine. The MED I-III modules were accepted and evaluated very positively. MED I objectively increased the participants’ knowledge. For an objective analysis of MED II, a grade comparison of the completed dissertation would be conceivable (participants compared to non-participants). Analogously, the success of the presentation and defense of the dissertations could be compared for an objective analysis of MED III. It will take a few years, however, to conduct such case-control studies since there is often a time lag of several years between participation in the course and the completion of the doctorate [ 5 ].

Based on our results to date, we recommend that other universities develop similar courses.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

• 1. Hachmeister CD. Im Blickpunkt. Promotionen als Indikator für die Leistung von Hochschulen Auswertung von Daten des Statistischen Bundesamtes und des CHE Rankings. Gütersloh: Centrum für Hochschulforschung; 2019. Available from: https://www.che.de/download/im_blickpunkt_promotionen_2019-pdf/ [ Google Scholar ]
• 2. Fabian G, Rehn T, Brandt G, Briedis K. Karriere mit Hochschulabschluss? Hannover: HIS Forum Hochschule; 2013. Available from: http://www.his.de/pdf/pub_fh/fh-201310.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• 3. Konsortium Bundesbericht wissenschaftlicher Nachwuchs. Bundesbericht Wissenschaftlicher Nachwuchs 2021. Statistische Daten und Forschungsbefunde zu Promovierenden und Promovierten in Deutschland. Bielefeld: wbv Media GmBH&Co.KG; 2021. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 4. Jüttemann A, Richter F, Wagner C, Dewey M. Entwicklung der Promotionssituation in der Medizin. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2014;139(15):767–773. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1369897. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 5. Bartels A. Der Sonderfall "medizinische Promotion": Motivation, Struktur und Rahmenbedingungen. Hannover: Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz Universität; 2019. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 6. Niethammer D. Empfehlungen zu forschungs- und lehrförderlichen Strukturen in der Universitätsmedizin. Berlin: Wissenschaftsrat; 2004. [ Google Scholar ]
• 7. Berning E, Falk S. Promovieren an den Universitäten in Bayern: Praxis, Modelle, Perspektiven. München: Bayrisches Staatsinstitut für Hochschulforschung und Hochschulplanung; 2006. p. 235. [ Google Scholar ]
• 8. Robra BP. Perspektiven der Universitätsmedizin. Gesundheitswesen. 2017;79(01):7–9. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-120287. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 9. Sennekamp M, Paulitsch MA, Broermann M, Klingebiel T, Gerlach FM. Auf dem Weg zum Dr. med. - Welche Unterstützung brauchen Promovierende der Medizin? Teil 1: Bestandsaufnahme und Konzeptentwicklung. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2016;110-111:69–76. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2015.12.004. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 10. Deutsches Zentrum für Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsforschung. Gute wissenschaftliche Praxis. Hannover: DZHW; 2013. Available from: https://www.dzhw.eu/gmbh/grundsaetze . [ Google Scholar ]
• 11. World Federation for Medical Education. BME. Hampton Middlesex: WFME Ltd; 2012. p. 46. Available from: https://wfme.org/standards/bme/ [ Google Scholar ]
• 12. Wissenschaftsrat. Empfehlung zur wissenschaftlichen Integrität. Positionspaper. Berlin: Wissenschaftsrat; 2015. Available from: https://www.wissenschaftsrat.de/download/archiv/4609-15.html . [ Google Scholar ]
• 13. Epstein N, Huber J, Gartmeier M, Berberat PO, Reimer M, Fischer MR. Investigation on the acquisition of scientific competences during medical studies and the medical doctoral thesis. GMS J Med Educ. 2018;35(2):Doc20. doi: 10.3205/zma001167. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 14. Beisiegel U. Motivation des Nachwuchses für die medizinische Forschung: Positionen des Wissenschaftsrates. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2009;52(8):850–855. doi: 10.1007/s00103-009-0904-7. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 15. Drees S, Schmitzberger F, Grohmann G, Peters H. The scientific term paper at the Charité: a project report on concept, implementation, and students' evaluation and learning. GMS J Med Educ. 2019;36(5):Doc53. doi: 10.3205/zma001261. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 16. Paulitsch MA, Gerlach FM, Klingebiel T, Sennekamp M. Auf dem Weg zum Dr. med. - Welche Unterstützung brauchen Promovierende der Medizin? Teil 2: Etablierung des Konzepts. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2016;110-111:77–84. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2015.12.003. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 17. Dittmar L, Echtermeyer F, Gessler M, Gronewold S, Kessen U, Klempahn K, Kruse S, Kühl M, Mayrhofer H, Moll K, Montero I, Oswald C, Petersen J, Shavinskaya A, Zingler N. Qualitätssicherung in der medizinischen Promotion. Band 11. Jena: UniWiND GUAT; 2020. Available from: https://www.uniwind.org/publikationen/publikationsreihe . [ Google Scholar ]
• 18. Claudia GK, Achim S, Oliver K, Benjamin M, Thomas W, Thomas B, Wolfgang O, Markus HL. What can structured doctoral programs contribute to ensure quality of medical dissertations and scientific careers/junior promotion? An evaluation using the "Experimental Medicine" program initiative of Ulm University as an example. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2019;147-148:110–119. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2019.10.001. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 19. Weichbold M. Pretest. In: Baur N, Blasius J, editors. Handbuch Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien; 2014. pp. 299–304. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 20. Hahne AK, Krause H, Pfaff H, Herzig S. Lerncharakteristika, Lernstrategien und Akzeptanz computerbasierten Lernens (CBL): Konstruktion und Faktorenstruktur eines Fragebogeninstrumentes. GMS Z Med Ausbild. 2005;22(1):Doc14. Available from: https://www.egms.de/de/journals/zma/2005-22/zma000014.shtml . [ Google Scholar ]
• 21. Schneider A, Kühl M, Kühl SJ. Longitudinal curriculum development: Gradual optimization of a biochemistry seminar. GMS J Med Educ. 2019;36(6):Doc73. doi: 10.3205/zma001281. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 22. Marsh EJ, Roediger HL, Bjork RA, Bjork EL. The memorial consequences of multiple-choice testing. Psychon Bull Rev. 2007;14(2):194–199. doi: 10.3758/BF03194051. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 23. DuPont Golda S. A case study on multiple-choice testing in anatomical sciences. Anat Sci Educ. 2011;4(1):44–48. doi: 10.1002/ase.197. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 24. Raski B, Eissner A. Implementation of online peer feedback for student self-reflection - first steps on the development of a feedback culture at a medical faculty. GMS J Med Educ. 2019;36(4):Doc42. doi: 10.3205/zma001250. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 25. Zimmermann A, Baerwald C, Fuchs M, Girbardt C, Götze H, Hempel G, et al. The longitudinal Communication Curriculum at Leipzig University, Medical Faculty - implementation and first experiences. GMS J MED Educ. 2021;38(3):Doc58. doi: 10.3205/zma001454. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 26. Melovitz Vasan CA, DeFouw DO, Holland BK, Vasan NS. Analysis of testing with multiple choice versus open-ended questions: Outcome-based observations in an anatomy course. Anat Sci Educ. 2018;11(3):254–261. doi: 10.1002/ase.1739. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 27. Hessler M, Pöpping DM, Hollstein H, Ohlenburg H, Arnemann PH, Massoth C, Seidel LM, Zarbock A, Wenk M. Availability of cookies during an academic course session affects evaluation of teaching. Med Educ. 2018;52(10):1064–1072. doi: 10.1111/medu.13627. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 28. Ward P, Clark T, Zabriskie R, Morris T. Paper/Pencil Versus Online Data Collection: An Exploratory Study. J Leis Res. 2012;46(1):84–105. doi: 10.1080/00222216.2014.11950314. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 29. Scherer T, Straub J, Schnyder D, Schaffner N. The Effects of Anonymity on Student Ratings of Teaching and Course Quality in a Bachelor Degree Programme. GMS Z Med Ausbild. 2013;30(3):Doc32. doi: 10.3205/zma000875. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• View on publisher site
• Collections

Similar articles

Cited by other articles, links to ncbi databases.

• Download .nbib .nbib
• Format: AMA APA MLA NLM

Add to Collections