administration to leadership to financial planning (budgeting) to policy setting to implementation and
planning (logistics).
2. Dissertation Competency: Evaluation Guidelines
The following are some guidelines for evaluating dissertations.
1.
Importance of the problem to public health
has the magnitude of the problem been characterized?
is a case made for its importance?
2.
Organisation/ Presentation
easy to read/understand
quality of tables and figures
logical progression of ideas
conformity with guidelines of target publication/standard format
3.
Abstract appropriately structured and an adequate reflection of paper’s content
4.
Introduction places the current study in the context of current knowledge
quality/thoroughness of literature review
demonstrates where this project fits in
5.
Design appropriate to answer the question
consideration given to options
rationale given for choosing design
strengths and limitations inherent in design discussed (validity)
strengths and weaknesses of measurements (reliability)
6.
Population appropriate to answer the research question
considerations/advantages/disadvantages of choice
7.
Analysis appropriate to answer the question
methods described; limitations noted
plan sufficient to address research question
level of data collection/coding sufficient
confounding/interaction/bias/design limitations accounted for
issues of power sample size addressed
8.
Plausibility of results appropriately addressed
9.
Public health implications appropriately addressed
10.
References complete and adequately reflecting current literature on the topic; peer-reviewed sources
provide adequate support for assumptions or background information.
11.
Overall scientific merit
is the study design appropriate to the stated objectives?
is the appropriate level of data used?
has an appropriate literature review been included?
does the project increase our understanding does it replicate inconclusive/controversial findings?
