dissertation first marker

100%

Excellent

High

Mid

Mid

Low

100

90 - 99

86 - 89

80 - 85

76 - 79

70 - 75

High

Mid

Low

67 - 69

64 - 66

60 - 63

High

Mid

Low

57 - 59

54 - 56

50 - 53

High

Mid

Low

Low

Low

Very low

Very low

Zero

47 - 49

44 - 46

40 - 43

36 - 39

30 - 35

21 - 29

1 - 20

0

MSc Project Marking Guidelines

The project is assessed on the basis of a written final dissertation. Dissertations will typically conform to the following format:

• Title page with abstract.
• Introduction : an introduction to the document, clearly stating the hypothesis or objective of the project, motivation for the work and the results achieved. The structure of the remainder of the document should also be outlined.
• Background : background to the project, previous work, exposition of relevant literature, setting of the work in the proper context. This should contain sufficient information to allow the reader to appreciate the contribution you have made.
• Description of the work undertaken : this may be divided into chapters describing the conceptual design work and the actual implementation separately. Any problems or difficulties and the suggested solutions should be mentioned. Alternative solutions and their evaluation should also be included.
• Analysis or Evaluation : results and their critical analysis should be reported, whether the results conform to expectations or otherwise and how they compare with other related work. Where appropriate evaluation of the work against the original objectives should be presented.
• Conclusion : concluding remarks and observations, unsolved problems, suggestions for further work.
• Bibliography.

This format is given for guidance only. The structure of an MSc dissertation should be chosen to suit the project.

• The problem is clearly stated and the student demonstrates an understanding of the problem.
• The work is `complete', with a coherent conclusion and evidence in support of it.
• The quality of the work demonstrates a thoroughness and clarity in approach.
• The quality of presentation is of an adequate standard, with the arguments well-structured and the English fluent.
• The student demonstrates extensive knowledge of the literature
• There is an excellent critical evaluation of previous work
• There is a critical evaluation of the student's own work
• There is sound justification of design decisions
• There is a novel solution of conceptual problems
• The amount of work undertaken is more than one would expect, in the time available.
• There is evidence of outstanding merit e.g. originality
• The dissertation includes material worthy of publication in peer-reviewed outlets.

Note that according to the University's marking regulations (see the document Taught Assessment Regulations (PDF) , and in particular page 32), a dissertation may be judged satisfactory, as presented and without alteration, despite containing small deficiencies and editorial imperfections.

Markers may not recommend that marginal fails be resubmitted with minor ammendments. Resubmissions are not permitted unless this has been approved by CSPC on the basis of a case submitted by the College of Science and Engineering (or in a case falling under Taught Assessment Regulation 58; see below). If the Board of Examiners wishes a student to resubmit, a case on the basis of special circumstances needs to be submitted to CSPC as a College-requested concession.

Note that the 'completion' criterion, B, covers achievement of the original objectives, achievement of modified objectives or providing convincing evidence that the objectives are unachievable. The 'outstanding merit' criterion, K, includes originality and the excellence of engineering.

Many dissertations will not fit neatly into any category, e.g. strong on additional criteria, but weak on a basic one. In this case, examiners are asked to trade one criterion off against another as best they can, bearing in mind that failure on a basic criterion is a serious fault.

The degree may be awarded with merit or with distinction . For distinction , a candidate must have been awarded at least 70% for the dissertation and other work from the taught element of the course must have also be assessed and awarded a mark which is close to, or above the 70% standard. For merit , at least 60% is required on both criteria.

Markers should be particularly careful about assigning grades at these two borderlines. In particular, if the marks assigned by the first and second marker are on different sides of a borderline, then a special justification is required for the agreed mark, explaining why the agreed mark is either below or above the borderline. This justification should be entered in the agreed mark form as free text.

Marks of 45-49. According to Taught Assessment Regulations (number 58), with a mark in this range the student may re-submit the thesis within 3 months, and both markers will need to re-mark the new submission. The same can happen in case of special circumstances, if the SC committee decides on a re-submission.

When examiners are aware of any mitigating factors which should be taken into account, these should not be compensated for in the assessment but should be mentioned in the appropriate section of the report with an indication of the degree of compensation felt to be appropriate. Similarly if an examiners feels that the dissertation does not do justice to the work carried out by the candidate, this should be made clear in the report together with an explanation. In all cases reasons for the overall grading must be given.

In the General Comments section, examiners should include a little contextual information as to what the thesis is about, in no more than one sentence or two. Supervisors should also note the extent to which the candidate was self-directed or required close supervision. Original contributions by the candidate or novelty in the project should also be highlighted. If the project involved extending existing code, the examiner should try to estimate how much work was put into researching the pre-existing background.

It is very important that the comments that are written on the mark sheet are sufficiently informative to justify the mark awarded the dissertation.

In all cases, it is the Board of Examiners that make the final decision, based on the mark sheets and agreed marks. Except under exceptional circumstances, individual mark sheets should be completed without consultation amongst examiners. If it is necessary to consult, this should be indicated appropriately on the submitted form.

Examiners are invited to nominate a dissertation for a prize if they think this is appropriate. Making such a nomination on the project marking form will allow External Examiners to adjudicate between competing projects.

• +44 (0) 207 391 9032

Recent Posts

• Why Is Your CV Getting Rejected and How to Avoid It
• Where to Find Images for Presentations
• What Is an Internship? Everything You Should Know
• How Long Should a Thesis Statement Be?
• How to Write a Character Analysis Essay
• Best Colours for Your PowerPoint Presentation: Top Colour Combinations
• How to Write a Nursing Essay – With Examples
• Top 5 Essential Skills You Should Build As An International Student
• How Professional Editing Services Can Take Your Writing to the Next Level
• How to Write an Effective Essay Outline: Template & Structure Guide
• Academic News
• Custom Essays
• Dissertation Writing
• Essay Marking
• Essay Writing
• Essay Writing Companies
• Model Essays
• Model Exam Answers
• Oxbridge Essays Updates
• PhD Writing
• Significant Academics
• Student News
• Study Skills
• University Applications
• University Essays
• University Life
• Writing Tips

An insider’s guide to markers and the marking process

(Last updated: 12 May 2021)

Since 2006, Oxbridge Essays has been the UK’s leading paid essay-writing and dissertation service

We have helped 10,000s of undergraduate, Masters and PhD students to maximise their grades in essays, dissertations, model-exam answers, applications and other materials. If you would like a free chat about your project with one of our UK staff, then please just reach out on one of the methods below.

Writing essays and dissertations, at any level of university study, is a tough task. Add to that the fact that many students have little-to-no idea what the person marking their work is actually looking for , and this sets the average student on a course for struggle before they’ve even begun.

With that in mind, the goal of the blog posts in this series on marking is to reveal some of the realities of marking and the marking process so that students can know what they are up against. Hopefully, this will also help some of you avoid the mistakes and blunders that may cost you a better grade.

In this first blog post we break down the situation, the institution and practice of marking.

What is the process of marking?

Let us first consider what is actually happening. In the vast majority of university courses, you will be required to submit written work to a professor, lecturer, or teaching assistant who will read your work and assign it a mark. Simple. The process is part exchange (your paper for a grade) and part evaluation (your paper is worth however much according to the marker). Most students assume that this process is fair, and that they are being graded by the standards established by the university. Students often also believe that the markers are not biased, hold all students to the same standard, and that each marker would grade any one paper in a similar way. And this is true, sometimes.

It is also true that the economic realities that many universities face have seriously altered this rather old fashioned ideal. Generally, students would prefer to have a class taught by a professor who has published and researched in their area and become famous. Sadly, in order for many professors to keep up with the demands of publishing they will have to cut back on the time they can devote to other areas of their work, and one of these is marking.

Let us suppose that you have a course with a professor and they have set you the task of writing a seven-page paper (a modest length). This professor is fairly popular and has an average class size of 20-25 students. This amounts to 140-175 pages of student writing that will need to be read, considered, commented on, and assigned a grade. There are, of course, class sizes double and even quintuple that enrolment that will also have a writing component.

And a truly dutiful professor will read each essay twice to get some idea of how they all fit within the class. But this is rare. The vast majority of markers will only read a paper once, regardless of how ‘fair’ they are, or how skilled they are in their field.

So ask yourself honestly, knowing that there are many other demands on your time (e.g. publishing, committee work, supervision, family duties) and probably other work that you would prefer doing – how much time and effort would you spend reading each of these papers? Or want to?

If the professor is fortunate (for them, not necessarily for you), they will have one to a half-dozen teaching assistants that will be familiar with the material, attend the lectures (and in some cases prepare and/or deliver them). And when all those papers, yours included, land on the desk or are submitted online, the professor is not likely to read any of them unless 1) the teaching assistant is utterly useless, which is rare because most want to impress the senior staff; 2) the paper is so bad that they cannot decide between a low-pass or a fail and will ask for guidance (contrary to common belief few teaching assistants are comfortable failing students); and 3) there is a case of plagiarism or academic dishonesty to be addressed. So only when your paper falls into one of these unfortunate categories will a professor read your paper, if it is first being handled by an assistant.

Teaching assistants

Teaching assistants are really a bowl of mixed nuts. Some are fantastic, wonderful, and competent. Others are well-meaning, but not quite able. And others are just wicked (as far as marking goes) and confuse academic rigour with some sort of sadism.

Many of these markers are not “trained” in the sense that they all will have a uniform idea of what to look for in the papers. Often these assistants, and really even some new lecturers, just muddle through. In fact, most will mark based on either how they experienced marking in their own studies, or on a more alarming and no less subjective picture of how they think grades should be assigned. And when push comes to shove and you feel you have been graded unfairly, a professor will often feel a personal obligation to side with the marker.

How do you know who will be marking your paper? You don’t. And this is why it is vital, so vital, that to do well on written work you cover all the bases and do everything in your power to produce your very best effort. And this is a matter we will return to in subsequent posts.

Communicate ideas well to get the best mark

For now, understand that this is why your best work is imperative: academic papers often are not as simple as right or wrong, pass or fail. There is a certain amount of grey area in writing academic papers that many undergraduate students do not fully understand. This is why marking papers can be difficult, and why teaching writing is a challenge that can take years to improve. It is the little things that often make or break a paper. It is not really about the ideas, but the way in which the ideas are communicated, that matters. This is what markers are sensitive to. Brilliant and incisive ideas buried in a crappy unreadable scattered paper is a fail. Boring ideas in a well-structured intelligible paper will pass. Think about that!

It’s also safe to say that writing papers is something that most academics “pick up” as they go. It is not something that they are trained in, but over time acquire a kind of feel for what good writing should look like.

Many students think that the process of marking is more or less fair and that this fairness is enshrined in a notional anonymity where papers can only be identified by student number or a registration number. This should, at least, save the student from anything personal during marking. However, what about students whose first language is not English and maybe their ability to express themselves is not as strong as their native-speaking peers? Do you think markers can tell the difference between a paper written by a native English speaker and one written by a non-native English speaker? Of course they can. And do you think this might create a conscious or subconscious bias in the mind of the marker? Or what about gender? Or race? Or socio-economic background? Are there any “tells” in the paper – words, phrases, or ideas – that someone might use, and that could reveal something about who they are? While none of that should matter, the point we want to make is that there are biases that can be present even where they should not, and you may have no idea if they are working against you. In truth, in a good paper, there will be nothing present that gives away your background. Nevertheless, you would be surprised at how easily these things are to detect among markers.

Now, in an ideal situation, you will have a capable professor reading your paper, and they will give you helpful feedback. Indeed, it would be the feedback from a professor that would be the most helpful. The feedback that comes from a marking assistant might be great, but it might be unhelpful. In fact, you may not even receive any substantive feedback at all. Often markers are more focused on pointing out all the things that you might have done wrong and less concerned with the ways that you might improve. It is unfair, sadly, considering the substantial investment of time and money students put into their education . But it is unlikely to change soon.

So why do academics often give poor feedback? Well, you should not suppose that all or even most of them do. It is quite likely that if they had sufficient time and motivation, markers could give excellent feedback. But consider the differences between professors/lecturers and marking assistants. Professors and lecturers will have not only gone through their graduate studies, which would involve a lot of writing, but they will have published (most likely) in peer-reviewed journals or a book (or more) with an academic press. This writing is reviewed by three experts anonymously - often by a professional and reputable company - and we can assure you, the evaluations do not hold back. Every small grammatical error that can be found will be pointed out. It is a thorough process and professors may, and should, hold graduate students to a high enough standard to prepare them for this publishing reality. The plain truth is that one of the reasons why professors and lecturers can give the best feedback is because they have experienced, no doubt, some of the hardest comments and criticisms to get their work published.

Conversely, markers do not have such experience. They haven’t gone through that process, and they are not yet professional academics. All they have is what they think that process might be like. This, we believe, is one of the biggest differences between the feedback you will get from the professional and, for all intents and purposes, the amateur.

The importance of multiple feedback

OK! We know exactly what you are thinking at this point. You are saying to yourself, but I am not a professional academic, amateur academic, or even aspiring academic. I am just a student on a course trying to find some way of getting a decent grade so I can graduate, go into the world to earn a living and have a nice life.

And that is fine, but if you want those high marks you have to understand that this is the system within which you are working. There are assumptions and rules, formal and informal, that affect how papers are written and how they are evaluated. It is, really, a culture, and you need to familiarise yourself with these rules in order to be successful.

Now, at this point, you are probably thinking, “Hang on! If writing is such a brutal process and professors get such scathing reports, how do they get published?! And what could this possibly have to do with me?”

Well, we are glad you asked.

There is probably a huge difference between what professors do and what you do. And it isn’t about style, or ideas, or content. Do this: go to the library and grab a little stack of academic books, somewhere between five and ten. Pretty much anything that has such-and-such university press will be an academic book. Now skim the prefaces of each of these books, do you notice anything they have in common?

Most prefaces are used by academic writers to say thank you for awards, or grants, and other forms of support. We are fairly certain that over half will have a few thanks to colleagues who read earlier drafts and provided feedback. This feedback allowed them to improve their work so that it could be published. Similarly, if they are fortunate, the anonymous reviewers will also offer helpful feedback.

Now, when was the last time you had a capable or professional reader go over your work before you handed it in? The chances are fairly good that the only person who read the work was you, while you were writing it. That is a bad route to follow.

A paper should always be read by someone else before it goes in for a formal evaluation. For more on this, read the next post in our marking series, Marking: the difference between right and wrong .

Marking: How we mark your essay to improve your grade

Marking: the difference between right and wrong, marking: from a marker’s perspective.

• academic writing
• better grades
• marking process
• study skills

Writing Services

• Essay Plans
• Critical Reviews
• Literature Reviews
• Presentations
• Dissertation Title Creation
• Dissertation Proposals
• Dissertation Chapters
• PhD Proposals
• Journal Publication
• CV Writing Service
• Business Proofreading Services

Editing Services

• Proofreading Service
• Editing Service
• Academic Editing Service

Additional Services

• Marking Services
• Consultation Calls
• Personal Statements
• Tutoring Services

Our Company

• Frequently Asked Questions
• Become a Writer

Terms & Policies

• Fair Use Policy
• Policy for Students in England
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Editing Service Examples
• [email protected]
• Contact Form

Payment Methods

Cryptocurrency payments.

• Formatting Your Dissertation
• Introduction

Harvard Griffin GSAS strives to provide students with timely, accurate, and clear information. If you need help understanding a specific policy, please contact the office that administers that policy.

• Application for Degree
• Credit for Completed Graduate Work
• Ad Hoc Degree Programs
• Acknowledging the Work of Others
• Dissertation Advisory Committee
• Publishing Options
• Subject, Invention, and Patents
• Submitting Your Dissertation
• English Language Proficiency
• PhD Program Requirements
• Secondary Fields
• Year of Graduate Study (G-Year)
• Master's Degrees
• Grade and Examination Requirements
• Conduct and Safety
• Financial Aid
• Non-Resident Students
• Registration
• Residence Halls
• Student Groups

When preparing the dissertation for submission, students must meet the following minimum formatting requirements. The Registrar’s Office will review the dissertation for compliance and these formatting elements and will contact the student to confirm acceptance or to request revision. The Harvard Griffin GSAS resource on dissertation formatting best practices expands on many of the elements below.

Please carefully review your dissertation before submitting it to ProQuestETD. The Registrar’s Office will email you through ProQuest if they have identified major formatting errors that need correction. Students will be provided with a brief extended deadline to make only the requested formatting updates.  

• Embedded Fonts : If fonts are not embedded, non-English characters may not appear as intended. It is the student’s responsibility to make sure that fonts are embedded properly prior to submission. Instructions for embedding fonts can be found on the Dissertation Formatting Guidance resource .  
• Thesis Acceptance Certificate: A copy of the Thesis Acceptance Certificate (TAC) should appear as the first page. This page should not be counted or numbered. The TAC will appear in the online version of the published dissertation. The author name and date on the TAC and title page should be the same.  
• Title Page: The dissertation begins with the title page; the title should be as concise as possible and should provide an accurate description of the dissertation. The author name and date on the TAC and title page should be the same. Do not print a page number on the title page. It is understood to be page  i  for counting purposes only. 
• Abstract : An abstract, numbered as page  iii , should immediately follow the copyright page and should state the problem, describe the methods and procedures used, and give the main results or conclusions of the research. The abstract will appear in the online version of the dissertation and will be made available by ProQuest and DASH. There is no maximum word count for the abstract.  
• Preliminary pages (abstract, table of contents, list of tables, graphs, illustrations, and preface) should use small Roman numerals (i, ii, iii, iv, v, etc.). 
• All pages must contain text or images.  
• Count the title page as page i and the copyright page as page ii, but do not print page numbers on either page. 
• For the body of text, use Arabic numbers (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc.) starting with page 1 on the first page of text.
• Page numbers must be centered throughout the manuscript at the top or bottom. 
• Every numbered page must be consecutively ordered, including tables, graphs, illustrations, and bibliography/index (if included); letter suffixes (such as 10a, 10b, etc.) are not allowed. 
• It is customary not to have a page number on the page containing a chapter heading. Check pagination carefully. Account for all pages. 
• Copyright Statement: A copyright notice should appear on a separate page immediately following the title page and include the copyright symbol ©, the year of first publication of the work, and the name of the author: © [ year ] [ Author’s Name ]. All rights reserved. Alternatively, students may choose to license their work openly under a Creative Commons license. The author remains the copyright holder while at the same time granting upfront permission to others to read, share, and—depending on the license—adapt the work so long as proper attribution is given. (If a student chooses a Creative Commons license, the copyright statement must not include the “all rights reserved” disclaimer and should instead indicate the specific Creative Commons license.) Please note: The copyright statement applies only to the student’s own work; the copyright status of third-party material incorporated into the dissertation will not change. Do not  print a page number on the copyright page. It is understood to be page  ii  for counting purposes only. 
• Abstract 
• Table of Contents 
• Front Matter 
• Body of Text 
• Back Matter 

Students can refer to the resource on Dissertation Formatting Best Practice Resource for information on best practices for front and back matter

Individual academic programs may require additional formatting elements to meet the standards of a specific field or discipline. Students are responsible to ensure that their Dissertation Advisory Committee is in support of the final formatting as signified by the sign off on the Thesis Acceptance Certificate. Any deviation from these requirements may lead to rejection of the dissertation and delay in the conferral of the degree. 

CONTACT INFO

Katie riggs, academic programs, explore events.

How are dissertations marked?

Quick Reply

Related discussions.

• What happens if you forgot to add an abstract for your dissertation?
• is 62 a good mark for dissertation?
• capped mark of zero
• EPQ dissertation
• LSE conditional offer - Submitting Documents
• 3 Weeks to write my diss, any pointers?
• What does it mean if I don’t need to attend a viva?
• Question regarding special circumstances and degree classification
• An issue with my dissertation
• Got a third in my second year and the highest I’ve achieved in third year was 55%
• Asking help for dissertation
• Is an average of 64.4 okay for third year?
• Low 2.2 in 2nd yr, can I get a 2.1/1st in 3rd yr?…
• Can I finish my dissertation in 3 weeks?
• University Degree Calculation
• I've submitted my assignment late, will it screw up my degree classification?
• Just got an A* in my EPQ - AMA
• Dissertation Advice

Last reply 1 day ago

Last reply 3 days ago

Last reply 4 days ago

Last reply 5 days ago

Last reply 6 days ago

Last reply 1 week ago

Last reply 2 weeks ago

Articles for you

What is a university lecture like?

What is an EPQ and why might you want to do one?

Finding a university place in Ucas Clearing 2024: 10 top tips to help you get ready

Top 10 tips for Ucas Clearing 2024

Try out the app

Continue on web

What Exactly Is A Dissertation (Or Thesis)?

If you’ve landed on this article, chances are you’ve got a dissertation or thesis project coming up (hopefully it’s not due next week!), and you’re now asking yourself the classic question, “what the #%#%^ is a dissertation?”…

In this post, I’ll break down the basics of exactly what a dissertation is, in plain language. No ivory tower academia.

So, let’s get to the pressing question – what is a dissertation?

A dissertation (or thesis) = a research project

Simply put, a dissertation (or thesis – depending on which country you’re studying in) is a research project . In other words, your task is to ask a research question (or set of questions) and then set about finding the answer(s). Simple enough, right?

Well, the catch is that you’ve got to undertake this research project in an academic fashion , and there’s a wealth of academic language that makes it all (look) rather confusing (thanks, academia). However, at its core, a dissertation is about undertaking research (investigating something). This is really important to understand, because the key skill that your university is trying to develop in you (and will be testing you on) is your ability to undertake research in a well-structured structured, critical and academically rigorous way.

This research-centric focus is significantly different from assignments or essays, where the main concern is whether you can understand and apply the prescribed module theory. I’ll explain some other key differences between dissertations or theses and assignments a bit later in this article, but for now, let’s dig a little deeper into what a dissertation is.

A dissertation (or thesis) is a process.

Okay, so now that you understand that a dissertation is a research project (which is testing your ability to undertake quality research), let’s go a little deeper into what that means in practical terms.

The best way to understand a dissertation is to view it as a process – more specifically a research process (it is a research project, after all). This process involves four essential steps, which I’ll discuss below.

Step 1 – You identify a worthy research question

The very first step of the research process is to find a meaningful research question, or a set of questions. In other words, you need to find a suitable topic for investigation. Since a dissertation is all about research, identifying the key question(s) is the critical first step. Here’s an example of a well-defined research question:

“Which factors cultivate or erode customer trust in UK-based life insurance brokers?”

This clearly defined question sets the direction of the research . From the question alone, you can understand exactly what the outcome of the research might look like – i.e. a set of findings about which factors help brokers develop customer trust, and which factors negatively impact trust.

But how on earth do I find a suitable research question, you ask? Don’t worry about this right now – when you’re ready, you can read our article about finding a dissertation topic . However, right now, the important thing to understand is that the first step in the dissertation process is identifying the key research question(s). Without a clear question, you cannot move forward.

Step 2 – You review the existing research

Once the research question is clearly established, the next step is to review the existing research/literature (both academic and professional/industry) to understand what has already been said with regard to the question. In academic speak, this is called a literature review .

This step is critically important as, in all likelihood, someone else has asked a similar question to yours, and therefore you can build on the work of others . Good academic research is not about reinventing the wheel or starting from scratch – it’s about familiarising yourself with the current state of knowledge, and then using that as your basis for further research.

Simply put, the first step to answering your research question is to look at what other researchers have to say about it. Sometimes this will lead you to change your research question or direction slightly (for example, if the existing research already provides a comprehensive answer). Don’t stress – this is completely acceptable and a normal part of the research process.

Step 3 – You carry out your own research

Once you’ve got a decent understanding of the existing state of knowledge, you will carry out your own research by collecting and analysing the relevant data. This could take to form of primary research (collecting your own fresh data), secondary research (synthesising existing data) or both, depending on the nature of your degree, research question(s) and even your university’s specific requirements.

Exactly what data you collect and how you go about analysing it depends largely on the research question(s) you are asking, but very often you will take either a qualitative approach (e.g. interviews or focus groups) or a quantitative approach (e.g. online surveys). In other words, your research approach can be words-based, numbers-based, or both . Don’t let the terminology scare you and don’t worry about these technical details for now – we’ll explain research methodology in later posts .

Step 4 – You develop answers to your research question(s)

Combining your understanding of the existing research (Step 2) with the findings from your own original research (Step 3), you then (attempt to) answer your original research question (s). The process of asking, investigating and then answering has gone full circle.

Of course, your research won’t always provide rock-solid answers to your original questions, and indeed you might find that your findings spur new questions altogether. Don’t worry – this is completely acceptable and is a natural part of the research process.

So, to recap, a dissertation is best understood as a research process, where you are:

• Ask a meaningful research question(s)
• Carry out the research (both existing research and your own)
• Analyse the results to develop an answer to your original research question(s).

Depending on your specific degree and the way your university designs its coursework, you might be asking yourself “but isn’t this just a longer version of a normal assignment?”. Well, it’s quite possible that your previous assignments required a similar research process, but there are some key differences you need to be aware of, which I’ll explain next.

Same same, but different…

While there are, naturally, similarities between dissertations/theses and assignments, its important to understand the differences  so that you approach your dissertation with the right mindset and focus your energy on the right things. Here, I’ll discuss four ways in which writing a dissertation differs substantially from assignments and essays, and why this matters.

Difference #1 – You must decide (and live with) the direction.

Unlike assignments or essays, where the general topic is determined for you, for your dissertation, you will (typically) be the one who decides on your research questions and overall direction. This means that you will need to:

• Find a suitable research question (or set of questions)
• Justify why its worth investigating (in the form of a research proposal )
• Find all the relevant existing research and familiarise yourself with the theory

This is very different from assignments, where the theory is given to you on a platter, and the direction is largely pre-defined. Therefore, before you start the dissertation process, you need to understand the basics of academic research, how to find a suitable research topic and how to source the relevant literature.

Difference #2 – It’s a long project, and you’re on your own.

A dissertation is a long journey, at least compared to assignments. Typically, you will spend 3 – 6 months writing around 15,000 – 25,000 words (for Masters-level, much more for PhD) on just one subject. Therefore, successfully completing your dissertation requires a substantial amount of stamina .

To make it even more challenging, your classmates will not be researching the same thing as you are, so you have limited support, other than your supervisor (who may be very busy). This can make it quite a lonely journey . Therefore, you need a lot of self-discipline and self-direction in order to see it through to the end. You should also try to build a support network of people who can help you through the process (perhaps alumni, faculty or a private coach ).

Difference #3 – They’re testing research skills.

We touched on this earlier. Unlike assignments or essays, where the markers are assessing your ability to understand and apply the theories, models and frameworks that they provide you with, your dissertation will be is assessing your ability to undertake high-quality research in an academically rigorous manner.

Of course, your ability to understand the relevant theory (i.e. within your literature review) is still very important, but this is only one piece of the research skills puzzle. You need to demonstrate the full spectrum of research skills.

It’s important to note that your research does not need to be ground-breaking, revolutionary or world-changing – that is not what the markers are assessing. They are assessing whether you can apply well-established research principles and skills to a worthwhile topic of enquiry. Don’t feel like you need to solve the world’s major problems. It’s simply not going to happen (you’re a first-time researcher, after all) – and doesn’t need to happen in order to earn good marks.

Difference #4 – Your focus needs to be narrow and deep.

In your assignments, you were likely encouraged to take a broad, interconnected, high-level view of the theory and connect as many different ideas and concepts as possible. In your dissertation, however, you typically need to narrow your focus and go deep into one particular topic. Think about the research question we looked at earlier:

The focus is intentionally very narrow – specifically the focus is on:

• The UK only – no other countries are being considered.
• Life insurance brokers only – not financial services, not vehicle insurance, not medical insurance, etc.
• Customer trust only – not reputation, not customer loyalty, not employee trust, supplier trust, etc.

By keeping the focus narrow, you enable yourself to deeply probe whichever topic you choose – and this depth is essential for earning good marks. Importantly, ringfencing your focus doesn’t mean ignoring the connections to other topics – you should still acknowledge all the linkages, but don’t get distracted – stay focused on the research question(s).

So, as you can see, a dissertation is more than just an extended assignment or essay. It’s a unique research project that you (and only you) must lead from start to finish. The good news is that, if done right, completing your dissertation will equip you with strong research skills, which you will most certainly use in the future, regardless of whether you follow an academic or professional path.

Wrapping up

Hopefully in this post, I’ve answered your key question, “what is a dissertation?”, at least at a big picture-level. To recap on the key points:

• A dissertation is simply a structured research project .
• It’s useful to view a dissertation as a process involving asking a question, undertaking research and then answering that question.
• First and foremost, your marker(s) will be assessing your research skills , so its essential that you focus on producing a rigorous, academically sound piece of work (as opposed to changing the world or making a scientific breakthrough).
• While there are similarities, a dissertation is different from assignments and essays in multiple ways. It’s important to understand these differences if you want to produce a quality dissertation.

In this post, I’ve gently touched on some of the intricacies of the dissertation, including research questions, data types and research methodologies. Be sure to check out the Grad Coach Blog  for more detailed discussion of these areas.

35 Comments

Hello Derek

Yes, I struggle with literature review and am highly frustrated (with myself).

Thank you for the guide that you have sent, especially the apps. I am working through the guide and busy with the implementation of it.

Hope to hear from you again!

Regards Micheal

Great to hear that, Michael. All the best with your research!

Very useful and clear information.

Thank you. That was quite something to move forward with. Despite the fact that I was lost. I will now be able to do something with the information given.

That’s great, Pheladi. Good luck!

Thank you so much for your videos and writing research proposal and dissertation. These videos are useful. I was struggling, but now I am starting to write. I hope to watch your more videos to learn more about the dissertation.

Before this post, I didn’t know where to start my research, today I have some light and do certain % of my research. I may need for direction on literature review. Big thanks to you.

Very very good Derek

Thanks immensely Derek

You’re welcome 🙂 Good luck with your dissertation/thesis.

Thank you Derek for widening my scope on research, this can be likened to a blind man whose eyes can now see.

Remain bless sir🙏

You guys are doing really great… I am extremely grateful for your help… Keep going.. Please activate that research help for indian students as well I couldn’t access it being an indian.

Hello Derek,

I got stuck in the concept paper because I changed my topic. Now I don’t know where to pick up the pieces again. How can I focus and stay on track. I am getting scared.

Thank you so much Derek, I am a new comer, learning for the first time how to write a good research. These in information’s to me is a mind opener, I hope to learn more from you in the future, Thanks and God bless.

Thanks Guys this means so much to me

A pretty good and insightful piece for beginners like me. Looking forward to more helpful hints and guide. Thanks to Derek.

This is so helpful…really appreciate your work.

Great to hear that

On cybersecurity Analytics research to banking transactions

This was of great help to me and quite informative .

Thank you so much GradCoach,

This is like a light at the end of the tunnel. You are a lifesaver. Thank you once again.

hello, I’m so grateful for such great information. It appears basic, but it is so relevant in understanding the research process.

Your website is very helpful for writing thesis. A big well done to the team. Do you have a website for paper writing and academic publishing or how to publish my thesis, how to land a fully funded PhD, etc. Just the general upward trajectory in the academia. Thank you

I have learned a lot from the lectures, it was beneficial and helped me a lot in my research journey. Thank you very much

Thank you for your gifts of enlightenment to a person like me who’s always a student. May your ‘well’not dry out.

It’s quite a fun and superb, now I have come to believe that the way one teach can have an impact in understanding and can change one’s assumption and position about a subject or a problem, before I came here and learn I consider research methodology a hard thing because, I wasn’t taught by a mentor like this one. Thanks so much who ever have make this effort to make this something easy and engaging

I can’t imagine that world has achieved major aspects of every field of study

Thank you very much for all the valuable, wonderful and comprehensive amount of information… I highly appreciate your support, 100% I recommend you

This topic is intended for my MPhil. Work (The perception of parents on Technical and Vocational Education, the impact on educational policy). May you consider the suitability of the topic for me and refine if the need be. Thank you,

Hello here…

i have gone through the notes and it is interesting. All i need now is a pdf file that contain a whole dissertation writing inclusive of chapter 1 to 5 on motivation as a topic… thanks

Remarkable!!! You made it sound so simple

I got stuck in my writing because I need to change my topic. I am getting scared as I have a semester left 🙁

Thanks for such an educational opportunity and support

Thanks for your educational opportunity and support

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Indian J Anaesth
• v.66(1); 2022 Jan

Dissertation writing in post graduate medical education

Department of Anaesthesiology, Dr. B R Ambedkar Medical College, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Mridul M Panditrao

1 Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Adesh Institute of Medical Sciences and Research (AIMSR), Bathinda, Punjab, India

2 Department of Anaesthesiology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India

Sukhminder Jit Singh Bajwa

3 Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Gian Sagar Medical College and Hospital, Patiala, Punjab, India

Nishant Sahay

4 Department of Anaesthesiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Patna, Bihar, India

Thrivikrama Padur Tantry

5 Department of Anaesthesiology, A J Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Kuntikana, Mangalore, Karnataka, India

Associated Data

A dissertation is a practical exercise that educates students about basics of research methodology, promotes scientific writing and encourages critical thinking. The National Medical Commission (India) regulations make assessment of a dissertation by a minimum of three examiners mandatory. The candidate can appear for the final examination only after acceptance of the dissertation. An important role in a dissertation is that of the guide who has to guide his protégés through the process. This manuscript aims to assist students and guides on the basics of conduct of a dissertation and writing the dissertation. For students who will ultimately become researchers, a dissertation serves as an early exercise. Even for people who may never do research after their degree, a dissertation will help them discern the merits of new treatment options available in literature for the benefit of their patients.

INTRODUCTION

The zenith of clinical residency is the completion of the Master's Dissertation, a document formulating the result of research conducted by the student under the guidance of a guide and presenting and publishing the research work. Writing a proper dissertation is most important to present the research findings in an acceptable format. It is also reviewed by the examiners to determine a part of the criteria for the candidate to pass the Masters’ Degree Examination.

The predominant role in a dissertation is that of the guide who has to mentor his protégés through the process by educating them on research methodology, by: (i) identifying a pertinent and topical research question, (ii) formulating the “type” of study and the study design, (iii) selecting the sample population, (iv) collecting and collating the research data accurately, (v) analysing the data, (vi) concluding the research by distilling the outcome, and last but not the least (vii) make the findings known by publication in an acceptable, peer-reviewed journal.[ 1 ] The co-guide could be a co-investigator from another department related to the study topic, and she/he will play an equivalent role in guiding the student.

Research is a creative and systematic work undertaken to increase the stock of knowledge.[ 2 ] This work, known as a study may be broadly classified into two groups in a clinical setting:

• Trials: Here the researcher intervenes to either prevent a disease or to treat it.
• Observational studies: Wherein the investigator makes no active intervention and merely observes the patients or subjects allocated the treatment based on clinical decisions.[ 3 ]

The research which is described in a dissertation needs to be presented under the following headings: Introduction, Aim of the Study, Description of devices if any or pharmacology of drugs, Review of Literature, Material and Methods, Observations and Results, Discussion, Conclusions, Limitations of the study, Bibliography, Proforma, Master chart. Some necessary certificates from the guide and the institute are a requirement in certain universities. The students often add an acknowledgement page before the details of their dissertation proper. It is their expression of gratitude to all of those who they feel have been directly or indirectly helpful in conduct of the study, data analysis, and finally construction of the dissertation.

Framing the research question (RQ)

It is the duty of the teacher to suggest suitable research topics to the residents, based on resources available, feasibility and ease of conduct at the centre. Using the FINER criteria, the acronym for feasibility, topical interest, novelty, ethicality and relevance would be an excellent way to create a correct RQ.[ 4 ]

The PICOT method which describes the patient, intervention, comparison, outcome and time, would help us narrow down to a specific and well-formulated RQ.[ 5 , 6 ] A good RQ leads to the derivation of a research hypothesis, which is an assumption or prediction of the outcome that will be tested by the research. The research topic could be chosen from among the routine clinical work regarding clinical management, use of drugs e.g., vasopressors to prevent hypotension or equipment such as high flow nasal oxygen to avoid ventilation.

Review of literature

To gather this information may be a difficult task for a fresh trainee however, a good review of the available literature is a tool to identify and narrow down a good RQ and generate a hypothesis. Literature sources could be primary (clinical trials, case reports), secondary (reviews, meta-analyses) or tertiary (e.g., reference books, compilations). Methods of searching literature could be manual (journals) or electronic (online databases), by looking up references or listed citations in existing articles. Electronic database searches are made through the various search engines available online e.g., scholar.google.com, National Library of Medicine (NLM) website, clinical key app and many more. Advanced searches options may help narrow down the search results to those that are relevant for the student. This could be based on synthesising keywords from the RQ, or by searching for phrases, Boolean operators, or utilising filters.

After choosing the topic, an apt and accurate title has to be chosen. This should be guided by the use of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terminology from the NLM, which is used for indexing, cataloguing, and searching of biomedical and health-related information.[ 7 ] The dissertation requires a detailed title which may include the objective of the study, key words and even the PICOT components. One may add the study design in the title e.g. “a randomised cross over study” or “an observational analytical study” etc.

Aim and the objectives

The Aims and the Objectives of the research study have to be listed clearly, before initiating the study.[ 8 ] “Gaps” or deficiencies in existing knowledge should be clearly cited. The Aim by definition is a statement of the expected outcome, while the Objectives (which might be further classed into primary and secondary based on importance) should be specific, measurable, achievable, realistic or relevant, time-bound and challenging; in short, “SMART!” To simplify, the aim is a statement of intent, in terms of what we hope to achieve at the end of the project. Objectives are specific, positive statements of measurable outcomes, and are a list of steps that will be taken to achieve the outcome.[ 9 ] Aim of a dissertation, for example, could be to know which of two nerve block techniques is better. To realise this aim, comparing the duration of postoperative analgesia after administration of the block by any measurable criteria, could be an objective, such as the time to use of first rescue analgesic drug. Similarly, total postoperative analgesic drug consumption may form a secondary outcome variable as it is also measurable. These will generate data that may be used for analysis to realise the main aim of the study.

Inclusion and exclusions

The important aspect to consider after detailing when and how the objectives will be measured is documenting the eligibility criteria for inclusion of participants. The exclusion criteria must be from among the included population/patients only. e.g., If only American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I and II are included, then ASA III and IV cannot be considered as exclusion criteria, since they were never a part of the study. The protocol must also delineate the setting of the study, locations where data would be collected, and specify duration of conduct of the dissertation. A written informed consent after explaining the aim, objectives and methodology of the study is legally mandatory before embarking upon any human study. The study should explicitly clarify whether it is a retrospective or a prospective study, where the study is conducted and the duration of the study.

Sample size: The sample subjects in the study should be representative of the population upon whom the inference has to be drawn. Sampling is the process of selecting a group of representative people from a larger population and subjecting them for the research.[ 10 ] The sample size represents a number, beyond which the addition of population is unlikely to change the conclusion of the study. The sample size is calculated taking into consideration the primary outcome criteria, confidence interval (CI), power of the study, and the effect size the researcher wishes to observe in the primary objective of the study. Hence a typical sample size statement can be - “Assuming a duration of analgesia of 150 min and standard deviation (SD) of 15 min in first group, keeping power at 80% and CIs at 95% (alpha error at 0.05), a sample of 26 patients would be required to detect a minimum difference (effect size) of 30% in the duration of analgesia between the two groups. Information regarding the different sampling methods and sample size calculations may be found in the Supplementary file 1 .

Any one research question may be answered using a number of research designs.[ 11 ] Research designs are often described as either observational or experimental. The various research designs may be depicted graphically as shown in Figure 1 .

Graphical description of available research designs

The observational studies lack “the three cornerstones of experimentation” – controls, randomisation, and replication. In an experimental study on the other hand, in order to assess the effect of treatment intervention on a participant, it is important to compare it with subjects similar to each other but who have not been given the studied treatment. This group, also called the control group, may help distinguish the effect of the chosen intervention on outcomes from effects caused by other factors, such as the natural history of disease, placebo effects, or observer or patient expectations.

All the proposed dissertations must be submitted to the scientific committee for any suggestion regarding the correct methodology to be followed, before seeking ethical committee approval.

Ethical considerations

Ethical concerns are an important part of the research project, right from selection of the topic to the dissertation writing. It must be remembered, that the purpose of a dissertation given to a post-graduate student is to guide him/her through the process by educating them on the very basics of research methodology. It is therefore not imperative that the protégés undertake a complicated or risky project. If research involves human or animal subjects, drugs or procedures, research ethics guidelines as well as drug control approvals have to be obtained before tabling the proposal to the Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC). The roles, responsibilities and composition of the Ethics Committee has been specified by the Directorate General of Health Services, Government of India. Documented approval of the Ethics committee is mandatory before any subject can be enroled for any dissertation in India. Even retrospective studies require approval from the IEC. Details of this document is available at: https://cdsco.gov.in/opencms/resources/UploadCDSCOWeb/2018/UploadEthicsRegistration/Applmhrcrr.pdf .

The candidate and the guide are called to present their proposal before the committee. The ethical implications, risks and management, subjects’ rights and responsibilities, informed consent, monetary aspects, the research and analysis methods are all discussed. The patient safety is a topmost priority and any doubts of the ethical committee members should be explained in medically layman's terms. The dissertation topics should be listed as “Academic clinical trials” and must involve only those drugs which are already approved by the Drugs Controller General of India. More commonly, the Committee suggests rectifications, and then the researchers have to resubmit the modified proposal after incorporating the suggestions, at the next sitting of the committee or seek online approval, as required. At the conclusion of the research project, the ethics committee has to be updated with the findings and conclusions, as well as when it is submitted for publication. Any deviation from the approved timeline, as well as the research parameters has to be brought to the attention of the IEC immediately, and re-approval sought.

Clinical trial registration

Clinical Trial Registry of India (CTRI) is a free online searchable system for prospective registration of all clinical studies conducted in India. It is owned and managed by the National Institute of Medical Statistics, a division of Indian Council of Medical Research, Government of India. Registration of clinical trials will ensure transparency, accountability and accessibility of trials and their results to all potential beneficiaries.

After the dissertation proposal is passed by the scientific committee and IEC, it may be submitted for approval of trial registration to the CTRI. The student has to create a login at the CTRI website, and submit all the required data with the help of the guides. After submission, CTRI may ask for corrections, clarifications or changes. Subject enrolment and the actual trial should begin only after the CTRI approval.

Randomisation

In an experimental study design, the method of randomisation gives every subject an equal chance to get selected in any group by preventing bias. Primarily, three basic types employed in post-graduate medical dissertations are simple randomisation, block randomisation and stratified randomisation. Simple randomisation is based upon a single sequence of random assignments such as flipping a coin, rolling of dice (above 3 or below 3), shuffling of cards (odd or even) to allocate into two groups. Some students use a random number table found in books or use computer-generated random numbers. There are many random number generators, randomisation programs as well as randomisation services available online too. ( https://www-users.york.ac.uk/~mb55/guide/randsery.htm ).

There are many applications which generate random number sequences and a research student may use such computer-generated random numbers [ Figure 2 ]. Simple randomisation has higher chances of unequal distribution into the two groups, especially when sample sizes are low (<100) and thus block randomisation may be preferred. Details of how to do randomisation along with methods of allocation concealment may be found in Supplementary file 2 .

Figure depicting how to do block randomisation using online resources. (a) generation of a random list (b) transfer of the list to an MS excel file

Allocation concealment

If it is important in a study to generate a random sequence of intervention, it is also important for this sequence to be concealed from all stake-holders to prevent any scope of bias.[ 12 ] Allocation concealment refers to the technique used to implement a random sequence for allocation of intervention, and not to generate it.[ 13 ] In an Indian post-graduate dissertation, the sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes (SNOSE) technique is commonly used [ Supplementary file 2 ].

To minimise the chances of differential treatment allocation or assessments of outcomes, it is important to blind as many individuals as possible in the trial. Blinding is not an all-or-none phenomenon. Thus, it is very desirable to explicitly state in the dissertation, which individuals were blinded, how they achieved blinding and whether they tested the success of blinding.

Commonly used terms for blinding are

• Single blinding: Masks the participants from knowing which intervention has been given.
• Double blinding: Blinds both the participants as well as researchers to the treatment allocation.
• Triple blinding: By withholding allocation information from the subjects, researchers, as well as data analysts. The specific roles of researchers involved in randomisation, allocation concealment and blinding should be stated clearly in the dissertation.

Data which can be measured as numbers are called quantitative data [ Table 1 ]. Studies which emphasise objective measurements to generate numerical data and then apply statistical and mathematical analysis constitute quantitative research. Qualitative research on the other hand focuses on understanding people's beliefs, experiences, attitudes, behaviours and thus these generate non-numerical data called qualitative data, also known as categorical data, descriptive data or frequency counts. Importance of differentiating data into qualitative and quantitative lies in the fact that statistical analysis as well as the graphical representation may be very different.

Data collection types

In order to obtain data from the outcome variable for the purpose of analysis, we need to design a study which would give us the most valid information. A valid data or measurement tool, is the degree to which the tool measures what it claims to measure. For example, appearance of end tidal carbon dioxide waveform is a more valid measurement to assess correct endotracheal tube placement than auscultation of breath sounds on chest inflation.

The compilation of all data in a ‘Master Chart’ is a necessary step for planning, facilitating and appropriate preparation and processing of the data for analysis. It is a complete set of raw research data arranged in a systematic manner forming a well-structured and formatted, computable data matrix/database of the research to facilitate data analysis. The master chart is prepared as a Microsoft Excel sheet with the appropriate number of columns depicting the variable parameters for each individual subjects/respondents enlisted in the rows.

Statistical analysis

The detailed statistical methodology applied to analyse the data must be stated in the text under the subheading of statistical analysis in the Methods section. The statistician should be involved in the study during the initial planning stage itself. Following four steps have to be addressed while planning, performing and text writing of the statistical analysis part in this section.

Step 1. How many study groups are present? Whether analysis is for an unpaired or paired situation? Whether the recorded data contains repeated measurements? Unpaired or paired situations decide again on the choice of a test. The latter describes before and after situations for collected data (e.g. Heart rate data ‘before’ and ‘after’ spinal anaesthesia for a single group). Further, data should be checked to find out whether they are from repeated measurements (e.g., Mean blood pressure at 0, 1 st , 2 nd , 5 th , 10 th minutes and so on) for a group. Different types of data are commonly encountered in a dissertation [ Supplementary file 3A ].

Step 2. Does the data follow a normal distribution?[ 14 ]

Each study group as well as every parameter has to be checked for distribution analysis. This step will confirm whether the data of a particular group is normally distributed (parametric data) or does not follow the normal distribution (non-parametric data); subsequent statistical test selection mainly depends on the results of the distribution analysis. For example, one may choose the Student's’ test instead of the ‘Mann-Whitney U’ for non-parametric data, which may be incorrect. Each study group as well as every parameter has to be checked for distribution analysis [ Supplementary File 3B ].

Step 3. Calculation of measures of central tendency and measures of variability.

Measures of central tendency mainly include mean, median and mode whereas measures of variability include range, interquartile range (IQR), SD or variance not standard error of mean. Depending on Step 2 findings, one needs to make the appropriate choice. Mean and SD/variance are more often for normally distributed and median with IQR are the best measure for not normal (skewed) distribution. Proportions are used to describe the data whenever the sample size is ≥100. For a small sample size, especially when it is approximately 25-30, describe the data as 5/25 instead of 20%. Software used for statistical analysis automatically calculates the listed step 3 measures and thus makes the job easy.

Step 4. Which statistical test do I choose for necessary analysis?

Choosing a particular test [ Figure 3 ] is based on orderly placed questions which are addressed in the dissertation.[ 15 ]

Chosing a statistical test, (a). to find a difference between the groups of unpaired situations, (b). to find a difference between the groups of paired situations, (c). to find any association between the variables, (d). to find any agreement between the assessment techniques. ANOVA: Analysis of Variance. Reproduced with permission from Editor of Indian Journal of Ophthalmology, and the author, Dr Barun Nayak[ 15 ]

• Is there a difference between the groups of unpaired situations?
• Is there a difference between the groups of paired situations?
• Is there any association between the variables?
• Is there any agreement between the assessment techniques?

Perform necessary analysis using user-friendly software such as GraphPad Prism, Minitab or MedCalc,etc. Once the analysis is complete, appropriate writing in the text form is equally essential. Specific test names used to examine each part of the results have to be described. Simple listing of series of tests should not be done. A typical write-up can be seen in the subsequent sections of the supplementary files [Supplementary files 3C – E ]. One needs to state the level of significance and software details also.

Role of a statistician in dissertation and data analysis

Involving a statistician before planning a study design, prior to data collection, after data have been collected, and while data are analysed is desirable when conducting a dissertation. On the contrary, it is also true that self-learning of statistical analysis reduces the need for statisticians’ help and will improve the quality of research. A statistician is best compared to a mechanic of a car which we drive; he knows each element of the car, but it is we who have to drive it. Sometimes the statisticians may not be available for a student in an institute. Self-learning software tools, user-friendly statistical software for basic statistical analysis thus gain importance for students as well as guides. The statistician will design processes for data collection, gather numerical data, collect, analyse, and interpret data, identify the trends and relationships in data, perform statistical analysis and its interpretation, and finally assist in final conclusion writing.

Results are an important component of the dissertation and should follow clearly from the study objectives. Results (sometimes described as observations that are made by the researcher) should be presented after correct analysis of data, in an appropriate combination of text, charts, tables, graphs or diagrams. Decision has to be taken on each outcome; which outcome has to be presented in what format, at the beginning of writing itself. These should be statistically interpreted, but statistics should not surpass the dissertation results. The observations should always be described accurately and with factual or realistic values in results section, but should not be interpreted in the results section.

While writing, classification and reporting of the Results has to be done under five section paragraphs- population data, data distribution analysis, results of the primary outcome, results of secondary outcomes, any additional observations made such as a rare adverse event or a side effect (intended or unintended) or of any additional analysis that may have been done, such as subgroup analysis.

At each level, one may either encounter qualitative (n/N and %) or quantitative data (mean [SD], median [IQR] and so on.

In the first paragraph of Results while describing the population data, one has to write about included and excluded patients. One needs to cite the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) flow chart to the text, at this stage. Subsequently, highlighting of age, sex, height, body mass index (BMI) and other study characteristics referring to the first table of ‘patients data’ should be considered. It is not desirable to detail all values and their comparison P values in the text again in population data as long as they are presented in a cited table. An example of this pattern can be seen in Supplementary file 3D .

In the second paragraph, one needs to explain how the data is distributed. It should be noted that, this is not a comparison between the study groups but represents data distribution for the individual study groups (Group A or Group B, separately)[ Supplementary file 3E ].

In the subsequent paragraph of Results , focused writing on results of the primary outcomes is very important. It should be attempted to mention most of the data outputs related to the primary outcomes as the study is concluded based on the results of this outcome analysis. The measures of central tendency and dispersion (Mean or median and SD or IQR etc., respectively), alongside the CIs, sample number and P values need to be mentioned. It should be noted that the CIs can be for the mean as well as for the mean difference and should not be interchanged. An example of this pattern can be seen in Supplementary file 3F .

A large number of the dissertations are guided for single primary outcome analysis, and also the results of multiple secondary outcomes are needed to be written. The primary outcome should be presented in detail, and secondary outcomes can be presented in tables or graphs only. This will help in avoiding a possible evaluator's fatigue. An example of this pattern can be seen in Supplementary file 3G .

In the last paragraph of the Results, mention any additional observations, such as a rare adverse event or side effect or describe the unexpected results. The results of any additional analysis (subgroup analysis) then need to be described too. An example of this pattern can be seen in Supplementary file 3H .

The most common error observed in the Results text is duplication of the data and analytical outputs. While using the text for summarising the results, at each level, it should not be forgotten to cite the table or graph but the information presented in a table should not be repeated in the text. Further, results should not be given to a greater degree of accuracy than that of the measurement. For example, mean (SD) age need to be presented as 34.5 (11.3) years instead of 34.5634 (11.349). The latter does not carry any additional information and is unnecessary. The actual P values need to be mentioned. The P value should not be simply stated as ‘ P < 0.05’; P value should be written with the actual numbers, such as ‘ P = 0.021’. The symbol ‘<’ should be used only when actual P value is <0.001 or <0.0001. One should try avoiding % calculations for a small sample especially when n < 100. The sample size calculation is a part of the methodology and should not be mentioned in the Results section.

The use of tables will help present actual data values especially when in large numbers. The data and their relationships can be easily understood by an appropriate table and one should avoid overwriting of results in the text format. All values of sample size, central tendency, dispersions, CIs and P value are to be presented in appropriate columns and rows. Preparing a dummy table for all outcomes on a rough paper before proceeding to Microsoft Excel may be contemplated. Appropriate title heading (e.g., Table 1 . Study Characteristics), Column Headings (e.g., Parameter studied, P values) should be presented. A footnote should be added whenever necessary. For outputs, where statistically significant P values are recorded, the same should be highlighted using an asterisk (*) symbol and the same *symbol should be cited in the footnote describing its value (e.g., * P < 0.001) which is self-explanatory for statistically significance. One should not use abbreviations such as ‘NS’ or ‘Sig’ for describing (non-) significance. Abbreviations should be described for all presented tables. A typical example of a table can be seen in Figure 4 .

Example of presenting a table

Graphical images

Similar to tables, the graphs and diagrams give a bird's-eye view of the entire data and therefore may easily be understood. bar diagrams (simple, multiple or component), pie charts, line diagrams, pictograms and spot maps suit qualitative data more whereas the histograms, frequency polygons, cumulative frequency, polygon scatter diagram, box and whisker plots and correlation diagrams are used to depict quantitative data. Too much presentation of graphs and images, selection of inappropriate or interchanging of graphs, unnecessary representation of three-dimensional graph for one-dimensional graphs, disproportionate sizes of length and width and incorrect scale and labelling of an axis should be avoided. All graphs should contain legends, abbreviation descriptions and a footnote. Appropriate labelling of the x - and the y -axis is also essential. Priori decided scale for axis data should be considered. The ‘error bar’ represents SDs or IQRs in the graphs and should be used irrespective of whether they are bar charts or line graphs. Not showing error bars in a graphical image is a gross mistake. An error bar can be shown on only one side of the line graph to keep it simple. A typical example of a graphical image can be seen in Figure 5 . The number of subjects (sample) is to be mentioned for each time point on the x -axis. An asterisk (*) needs to be put for data comparisons having statistically significant P value in the graph itself and they are self-explanatory with a ‘stand-alone’ graph.

Example of an incorrect (a) and correct (b) image

Once the results have been adequately analysed and described, the next step is to draw conclusions from the data and study. The main goal is to defend the work by staging a constructive debate with the literature.[ 16 ] Generally, the length of the ‘ Discussion ’ section should not exceed the sum of other sections (introduction, material and methods, and results).[ 17 ] Here the interpretation, importance/implications, relevance, limitations of the results are elaborated and should end in recommendations.

It is advisable to start by mentioning the RQ precisely, summarising the main findings without repeating the entire data or results again. The emphasis should be on how the results correlate with the RQ and the implications of these results, with the relevant review of literature (ROL). Do the results coincide with and add anything to the prevalent knowledge? If not, why not? It should justify the differences with plausible explanation. Ultimately it should be made clear, if the study has been successful in making some contribution to the existing evidence. The new results should not be introduced and any exaggerated deductions which cannot be corroborated by the outcomes should not be made.

The discussion should terminate with limitations of the study,[ 17 ] mentioned magnanimously. Indicating limitations of the study reflects objectivity of the authors. It should not enlist any errors, but should acknowledge the constraints and choices in designing, planning methodology or unanticipated challenges that may have cropped up during the actual conduct of the study. However, after listing the limitations, the validity of results pertaining to the RQ may be emphasised again.

This section should convey the precise and concise message as the take home message. The work carried out should be summarised and the answer found to the RQ should be succinctly highlighted. One should not start dwelling on the specific results but mention the overall gain or insights from the observations, especially, whether it fills the gap in the existing knowledge if any. The impact, it may have on the existing knowledge and practices needs to be reiterated.

What to do when we get a negative result?

Sometimes, despite the best research framework, the results obtained are inconclusive or may even challenge a few accepted assumptions.[ 18 ] These are frequently, but inappropriately, termed as negative results and the data as negative data. Students must believe that if the study design is robust and valid, if the confounders have been carefully neutralised and the outcome parameters measure what they are intended to, then no result is a negative result. In fact, such results force us to critically re-evaluate our current understanding of concepts and knowledge thereby helping in better decision making. Studies showing lack of prolongation of the apnoea desaturation safety periods at lower oxygen flows strengthened belief in the difficult airway guidelines which recommend nasal insufflations with at least 15 L/min oxygen.[ 19 , 20 , 21 ]

Publishing the dissertation work

There are many reporting guidelines based upon the design of research. These are a checklist, flow diagram, or structured text to guide authors in reporting a specific type of research, developed using explicit methodology. The CONSORT[ 22 ] and Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) initiatives,[ 23 ] both included in the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) international network, have elaborated appropriate suggestions to improve the transparency, clarity and completeness of scientific literature [ Figure 6 ].

Equator publishing tree

All authors are advised to follow the CONSORT/STROBE checklist attached as Supplementary file 4 , when writing and reporting their dissertation.

For most dissertations in Anaesthesiology, the CONSORT, STROBE, Standards for Reporting Diagnostic accuracy studies (STARD) or REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK) guidelines would suffice.

Abstract and Summary

These two are the essential sections of a dissertation.

It should be at the beginning of the manuscript, after the title page and acknowledgments, but before the table of contents. The preparation varies as per the University guidelines, but generally ranges between 150 to 300 words. Although it comes at the very beginning of the thesis, it is the last part one writes. It must not be a ‘copy-paste job’ from the main manuscript, but well thought out miniaturisation, giving the overview of the entire text. As a rule, there should be no citation of references here.

Logically, it would have four components starting with aims, methods, results, and conclusion. One should begin the abstract with the research question/objectives precisely, avoiding excessive background information. Adjectives like, evaluate, investigate, test, compare raise the curiosity quotient of the reader. This is followed by a brief methodology highlighting only the core steps used. There is no need of mentioning the challenges, corrections, or modifications, if any. Finally, important results, which may be restricted to fulfilment (or not), of the primary objective should be mentioned. Abstracts end with the main conclusion stating whether a specific answer to the RQ was found/not found. Then recommendations as a policy statement or utility may be made taking care that it is implementable.

Keywords may be included in the abstract, as per the recommendations of the concerned university. The keywords are primarily useful as markers for future searches. Lastly, the random reader using any search engine may use these, and the identifiability is increased.

The summary most often, is either the last part of the Discussion or commonly, associated with the conclusions (Summary and Conclusions). Repetition of introduction, whole methodology, and all the results should be avoided. Summary, if individually written, should not be more than 150 to 300 words. It highlights the research question, methods used to investigate it, the outcomes/fallouts of these, and then the conclusion part may start.

References/bibliography

Writing References serves mainly two purposes. It is the tacit acknowledgement of the fact that someone else's written words or their ideas or their intellectual property (IP) are used, in part or in toto , to avoid any blame of plagiarism. It is to emphasise the circumspective and thorough literature search that has been carried out in preparation of the work.

Vancouver style for referencing is commonly used in biomedical dissertation writing. A reference list contains details of the works cited in the text of the document. (e.g. book, journal article, pamphlet, government reports, conference material, internet site). These details must include sufficient details so that others may locate and access those references.[ 24 ]

How much older the references can be cited, depends upon the university protocol. Conventionally accepted rule is anywhere between 5-10 years. About 85% of references should be dispersed in this time range. Remaining 15%, which may include older ones if they deal with theories, historical aspects, and any other factual content. Rather than citing an entire book, it is prudent to concentrate on the chapter or subsection of the text. There are subjective variations between universities on this matter. But, by and large, these are quoted as and when deemed necessary and with correct citation.

Bibliography is a separate list from the reference list and should be arranged alphabetically by writing name of the ‘author or title’ (where no author name is given) in the Vancouver style.

There are different aspects of writing the references.[ 24 ]

Citing the reference in the form of a number in the text. The work of other authors referred in the manuscript should be given a unique number and quoted. This is done in the order of their appearance in the text in chronological order by using Arabic numerals. The multiple publications of same author shall be written individually. If a reference article has more than six authors, all six names should be written, followed by “ et al .” to be used in lieu of other author names. It is desirable to write the names of the journals in abbreviations as per the NLM catalogue. Examples of writing references from the various sources may be found in the Supplementary file 5 .

Both the guide and the student have to work closely while searching the topic initially and also while finalising the submission of the dissertation. But the role of the guide in perusing the document in detail, and guiding the candidate through the required corrections by periodic updates and discussions cannot be over-emphasised.

Assessment of dissertations

Rarely, examiners might reject a dissertation for failure to choose a contemporary topic, a poor review of literature, defective methodology, biased analysis or incorrect conclusions. If these cannot be corrected satisfactorily, it will then be back to the drawing board for the researchers, who would have to start from scratch to redesign the study, keeping the deficiencies in mind this time.

Before submission, dissertation has to be run through “plagiarism detector” software, such as Turnitin or Grammarly to ensure that plagiarism does not happen even unwittingly. Informal guidelines state that the percentage plagiarism picked up by these tools should be <10%.

No work of art is devoid of mistakes/errors. Logically, a dissertation, being no exception, may also have errors. Our aim, is to minimise them.

The dissertation is an integral part in the professional journey of any medical post-graduate student. It is also an important responsibility for a guide to educate his protégé, the basics of research methodology through the process. Searching for a gap in literature and identification of a pertinent research question is the initial step. Careful planning of the study design is a vitally important aspect. After the conduct of study, writing the dissertation is an art for which the student often needs guidance. A good dissertation is a good description of a meticulously conducted study under the different headings described, utilising the various reporting guidelines. By avoiding some common errors as discussed in this manuscript, a good dissertation can result in a very fruitful addition to medical literature.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

SUPPLEMENTARY FILES

Stanford University

Introducing Our 2024-25 Pre and Postdoctoral Fellows

• Nora Sulots

Stanford University’s Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) is proud to announce the incoming fellows who will be joining us in the 2024-2025 academic year to develop their research, engage with faculty, and tap into our diverse scholarly community.

The pre- and postdoctoral program will provide fellows the time to focus on research and data analysis as they work to finalize and publish their dissertation research while connecting with resident faculty and research staff at CDDRL.

Fellows will present their research during our  weekly research seminar series and an array of scholarly events and conferences.

Meet the Fellows

Julieta casas.

Hometown: Buenos Aires, Argentina Academic Institution: Johns Hopkins University Discipline and degree conferral date (or expected): PhD Candidate in Political Science, expected summer 2024

Research Interests: State capacity, bureaucratic politics, democratization, comparative historical analysis, American political development, and Latin American politics.

Dissertation Title: Building Bureaucratic Capacity: The Political Origins of Civil Service Reforms

What attracted you to the CDDRL Pre/ Postdoctoral program? I was drawn to CDDRL’s vibrant intellectual community and their concern with addressing the crucial questions of our time from an interdisciplinary and methodologically plural perspective. I was also attracted to the opportunities the Center offers to learn from scholars working on governance and democracy in different regions around the world.

What do you hope to accomplish during your nine-month residency at CDDRL? I look forward to working on my book project during my residency at CDDRL. Based on my dissertation, the book concerns effective representative governance and the paths countries can take to achieve it. The study highlights the importance that varieties of patronage have for bureaucratic reform in democratic contexts — some types of patronage are more likely to create favorable conditions for reform than others due to the incentives that their personnel management practices create.

Fun fact: My first job was in the Argentine bureaucracy, which I now study!

Jasmine English

Hometown: Belfast, Northern Ireland Academic Institution: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Discipline and degree conferral date (or expected): PhD Candidate in Political Science, expected June 2024

Research Interests: Identity politics, interracial solidarity, political discussion, political violence, the carceral state, and American politics.

Dissertation Title: Essays on the Content and Consequences of Political Discussion

What attracted you to the CDDRL Pre/ Postdoctoral program? I was drawn to CDDRL’s interdisciplinary approach to the study of democracy. I am particularly excited to engage with scholars working on identity politics, deliberation, and political violence. 

What do you hope to accomplish during your nine-month residency at CDDRL? During my time at the Center, I’m hoping to complete several articles on political discussion, interracial solidarity, and the carceral state. I’d also like to start some new projects on related topics with collaborators at CDDRL. 

Fun fact: I’m a big fan of cold water swimming and am trying to complete 50 swims this year.

Alex Mierke-Zatwarnicki

Hometown: Vancouver, BC, Canada Academic Institution: Harvard University (PhD) / European University Institute (Max Weber Fellow) Discipline and degree conferral date (or expected): PhD in Government, November 2023 

Research Interests: Political parties, party organization, group identity, cleavages, civil society, and political communication.

Dissertation Title: Identity politics, old and new: Party-building in the long twentieth century

What attracted you to the CDDRL Pre/ Postdoctoral program? I really love how CDDRL brings together scholars working across regions and topics, truly embodying the spirit and method of ‘comparative politics.’ My work focuses on Western Europe but takes a lot of influence from scholarship on party politics elsewhere in the world. Moving forward, I want to become more embedded in broader comparative debates about democracy and political development, and I think CDDRL will be a great place to start joining those conversations. 

What do you hope to accomplish during your nine-month residency at CDDRL? I’m currently in the early stages of expanding my dissertation into a book, which requires adding a bunch of new cases and additional data. I’m hoping to make substantial progress on this while at CDDRL and to also start thinking more seriously about which questions and ideas I want to pursue for my next big project. 

Fun fact: During the pandemic, I got back into reading fiction, and I really love it! Last year, I read over a hundred novels and am on track to hit that milestone again in 2024.

Ivetta Sergeeva

Hometown: Saint Petersburg, Russia Academic Institution: European University Institute Discipline and degree conferral date (or expected): PhD in Political and Social Sciences, expected October 2024

Research Interests: Migration and citizenship, political behavior, and civil society.

Dissertation Title: Three Essays on Russian Political Migration Following the 2022 Full-Scale Invasion of Ukraine

What attracted you to the CDDRL Pre/ Postdoctoral program? I'm drawn to CDDRL for its interdisciplinary focus and emphasis on the practical impacts of research, which aligns with my previous experience as a practitioner and my goals as a social scientist.

What do you hope to accomplish during your nine-month residency at CDDRL? I want to develop a book project about politically-induced migration. I also plan to continue serving as the co-principal investigator in my research project OutRush, a panel survey of Russian migrants that I co-lead with Emil Kamalov.

Fun fact: I wrote most of my PhD dissertation while listening to the electronic musician Christian Löffler.

Gillian Slee

Hometown: Laguna Beach, California Academic Institution: Princeton University Discipline and degree conferral date (or expected): PhD Candidate in Sociology and Social Policy, expected July 2024

Research Interests: Inequality, poverty, democratic governance, law and society, justice and reentry, work and organizations, and social policy.

Dissertation Title: Humanizing Institutions: Inequality, Dysfunction, and Reform in the Parole Process

What attracted you to the CDDRL Pre/ Postdoctoral program? CDDRL’s commitment to scholarship on key challenges associated with democratic governance and the rule of law and its sustained investment in producing research that will work to promote equity and justice in contemporary society aligns deeply with my scholarly orientation. 

What do you hope to accomplish during your nine-month residency at CDDRL? I aim to publish academic articles and work on a book manuscript documenting persons’ grounded experiences serving parole in the United States. While doing so, I will advance my broader intellectual project — to identify how state processes may better serve involved parties and ameliorate inequality. I look forward to engaging with CDDRL scholars committed to bridging the divide between scholarship and practice and, most importantly, to asking critical questions about the work and health of democratic governance. 

Fun fact: I’m a firm believer in spending ample time outdoors (surfing, hiking, and more!), tripling the garlic in recipes, and indulging in well-placed, dumb jokes.