university of manchester dissertation examples

Find Student theses

Filters for student theses.

• 1 - 50 out of 12,301 results
• Award date (ascending)

Search results

Surrogate machine learning model development for the uk nuclear industry.

Supervisor: Brown, G. (Supervisor) & Mu, T. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Phd

Fulfilling the Psychological Needs of Open-Source Software Developers: Challenges and Strategies for Effective Human Resource Management

Supervisor: Mcbride, A. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Doctor of Business Administration

Micromechanics of CFRP Composite Kinking Investigated through X Ray Computed Tomography

Supervisor: Potluri, P. (Supervisor) & Withers, P. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Master of Philosophy

Timing Pulsars with the Thousand Pulsar Array on MeerKAT

Supervisor: Leahy, J. P. (Supervisor) & Keith, M. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Master of Science by Research

Visualizing Quantum Turbulence in Superfluid 4He in the T=0 Limit

Supervisor: Golov, A. (Supervisor) & Walmsley, P. (Supervisor)

Statistical Time Series Prediction with Deep Learning Methodology

Supervisor: Yuan, J. (Supervisor) & Boshnakov, G. (Supervisor)

The pathophysiology of vaginally inserted polypropylene midurethral mesh tape complications, based on the microbiome and biofilms

Supervisor: Mcbain, A. (Supervisor) & Reid, F. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Doctor of Medicine

Organisational Support for ICT4D Practitioner Performance: A New Pathway for Enhancing ICT4D Project Outcomes

Supervisor: Cunningham, N. (Supervisor), Heeks, R. (Supervisor) & Renken, J. (Supervisor)

Renovascular Disease: improving outcomes in atherosclerotic disease and new initiatives in fibromuscular dysplasia.

Supervisor: Kalra, P. (Supervisor) & Chrysochou, C. (Supervisor)

Dancing the Spiritual Self in Ecstatic Dance

Supervisor: Cox, R. (Supervisor) & Bithell, C. (Supervisor)

Between revelation and concealment: Crafting Gulag truths in Tbilisi, Georgia

Supervisor: Jansen, S. (Supervisor)

TEXTUAL MENTAL ILLNESS DETECTION FROM SOCIAL MEDIA USING DEEP LEARNING

Supervisor: Ananiadou, S. (Supervisor) & Tsujii, J. (Supervisor)

Commissioning and Data-Handling for the L-BASS Instrument

Supervisor: Leahy, J. P. (Supervisor) & Dickinson, C. (Supervisor)

Role of First Amino Acid on the Self-Assembly and Gelation Pathways of Beta-Sheet Forming Octa Peptides

Supervisor: Miller, A. (Supervisor) & Saiani, A. (Supervisor)

Continuous Use of Mobile Payment in China and the USA: Three Sequential Studies with a Mixed-methods Approach

Supervisor: Chen, Y. (Supervisor)

Capacity in glaucoma care: The role of optometry and innovations in service delivery

Supervisor: Dickinson, C. (Supervisor) & Harper, R. (Supervisor)

Estimating driver state from facial features

Supervisor: Cootes, T. (Supervisor) & Galata, A. (Supervisor)

Effect of Hyaluronan on Pancreatic cancer cell hallmark responses: Focus on cell migration

Supervisor: Humphries, M. J. (Supervisor) & Bruce, J. (Supervisor)

The Functional Characterisation of Risk Loci Associated to Musculoskeletal Diseases

Supervisor: Eyre, S. (Supervisor) & Orozco, G. (Supervisor)

Behavioural consequences of maternal stressors in a rat model for schizophrenia

Supervisor: Glazier, J. (Supervisor), Hager, R. (Supervisor) & Neill, J. (Supervisor)

The Everyday Feminist Politics of (in)Security: A Curious Inquiry into Staff-Student Sexual Violence in UK Universities.

Supervisor: Masters, C. (Supervisor) & Mcleod, L. (Supervisor)

Efficient Approximation of Parametric Parabolic Partial Differential Equations

Supervisor: Silvester, D. (Supervisor) & Powell, C. (Supervisor)

Panic and Anxiety in Non-Epileptic Attack Disorder: Diagnostic and Mechanistic Implications

Supervisor: Brown, R. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Doctor of Clinical Psychology

Comorphisms, Duality, and L-infinity Comorphisms

Supervisor: Voronov, T. (Supervisor)

Impact of feed addition on UPR-related gene expression in CHO

Supervisor: Dickson, A. (Supervisor)

Lived experiences of postmenopausal Omani women with osteoporosis: a hermeneutic phenomenological study

Supervisor: O'Neill, T. (Supervisor), Brooks, J. (Supervisor) & Stanmore, E. (Supervisor)

GEOGRAPHICAL DISPARITIES IN ACCESS TO SYSTEMIC ANTI CANCER THERAPIES FOR ADVANCED BREAST CANCER ACROSS GREATER MANCHESTER

Supervisor: Taylor, S. (Supervisor), Howell, S. (Supervisor), Yorke, J. (Supervisor) & Marsden, A. (Supervisor)

Understanding the deformation differences between AZ31 and ZEK100 wrought magnesium alloys through Digital Image Correlation study

Supervisor: Robson, J. (Supervisor) & Quinta da Fonseca, J. (Supervisor)

ADVANCES IN HAEMATOPOIETIC STEM CELL THERAPY INCLUDING CORD BLOOD AND STEM CELL GENE THERAPY

Supervisor: Bigger, B. (Supervisor) & Wynn, R. (Supervisor)

Investigating Language Processing of Social and Indirect Communication During Reading in An Autistic and Non-Autistic Population.

Supervisor: Gowen, E. (Supervisor), Stewart, A. (Supervisor) & Mcbride, J. (Supervisor)

The power of language in mental health settings: A Foucauldian Discourse Analysis of clinician-service user interaction and implications for psychological practice

Supervisor: Shuttleworth, J. (Supervisor) & Burman, E. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Doctor of Counselling Psychology

Designing Tacitly: A Study of Concept Design in the Milieu of Interior and Architecture Design Practices

Supervisor: Szacka, L. (Supervisor) & Lewis, A. (Supervisor)

Promoting tissue repair with natural cell-signalling peptides

Supervisor: Sherratt, M. (Supervisor), Gilmore, A. (Supervisor) & Ozols, M. (Supervisor)

Differential Geometry Inspired Machine Learning Solutions

Supervisor: Zeng, X. (Supervisor) & Mu, T. (Supervisor)

Mixed effects modelling of tumour growth in response to radiation and immunogenic combinations

Supervisor: Mistry, H. (Supervisor), Aarons, L. (Supervisor) & Ogungbenro, K. (Supervisor)

Development of an ex-vivo skin model to investigate the pigmentary changes induced by the topical application of particulate matter

Supervisor: Watson, R. (Supervisor) & Langton, A. (Supervisor)

Models for the electronic properties of twistronic few-layer graphenes

Supervisor: Fal'ko, V. (Supervisor)

Leader-member exchange (LMX) differentiation: Defining, measuring, and empirically testing the perceived degree and bases of LMX variation

Supervisor: Hughes, D. J. (Supervisor) & Martin, R. (Supervisor)

Isotopic Purity Enhancement of In-Plane Thermal Conductivity of Hexagonal Boron Nitride

Supervisor: Novoselov, K. (Supervisor) & Kretinin, A. (Supervisor)

The humanitarian imagination: L. T. Hobhouse and the dialectic of liberal utopia

Supervisor: Jones, H. S. (Supervisor) & Taithe, B. (Supervisor)

Approaching Terrorism on Screen: Contemporary Film and Television in France and Belgium

Supervisor: McGonagle, J. (Supervisor) & Waldron, D. (Supervisor)

Development of a Tool to Predict Dosimetric Consequences of Anatomical Changes During Radiotherapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Supervisor: Handley, J. (Supervisor)

Student thesis : Unknown

EXPLORE: Fitting Model Spectra Energy Distributions to Multi-Band Photometric Data

Supervisor: Zijlstra, A. (Supervisor) & Mcdonald, I. (Supervisor)

Programming of cardiac mitochondrial function by developmental hypoxia

Supervisor: Oceandy, D. (Supervisor) & Galli, G. (Supervisor)

The Role of Nuclear Hormone Receptor (NHR) Cofactors in Breast Carcinogenesis

Supervisor: Demonacos, C. (Supervisor) & Latif, A. (Supervisor)

Management of Radionuclide Contamination in Groundwaters at Sellafield: In situ Phosphate Mineralisation Approaches

Supervisor: Shaw, S. (Supervisor), Morris, K. (Supervisor) & Lloyd, J. (Supervisor)

Investigating the Electronic Structure of Uranium Complexes

Supervisor: Natrajan, L. (Supervisor) & Chilton, N. (Supervisor)

A study of bioglass air abrasion of Mg alloys for biodegradable bone implants

Supervisor: Thomas, A. (Supervisor) & Chen, X. (Supervisor)

Understanding the Morphology and Properties of 2D Material Reinforced Nanocomposites

Supervisor: Young, R. (Supervisor), Li, Z. (Supervisor) & Burnett, T. (Supervisor)

BETWEEN RELIGION AND EXTRACTIVISM: MISSIONARY THEOPOLITICS IN THE NORTHERN ECUADORIAN AMAZON

Supervisor: Wade, P. (Supervisor) & Harvey, P. (Supervisor)

Theses: UK Theses

• Manchester Theses
• Worldwide theses

Key UK dissertation and theses resource

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

Finding and accessing UK theses

• Electronic Theses Online Service (EThOS) EThOS is the UK’s national thesis service which aims to maximise the visibility and availability of the UK’s doctoral research theses. EThOS aims to provide a national aggregated record of all doctoral theses awarded by UK Higher Education institutions and free access to the full text of as many theses as possible for use by all researchers. There are approximately 440,000 records relating to theses awarded by over 120 institutions of which around 160,000 are available as full text. Requests for many of the remainder can be ordered for scanning through the EThOS digitisation-on-demand facility. You can download digitised PhD thesis from across the UK for free once you have registered on the website. Records are held for all UK PhD-awarding institutions, but EThOS does not yet hold all records for all institutions. This is constantly updated as more theses including University of Manchester outputs from March 2013 are submitted solely in electronic form.

• Web of Science Conference Proceedings via Web of Science: Index to published proceedings for international conferences, symposia, seminars, colloquia, workshops and conventions across a wide range of disciplines. Proceedings relating to Business and Management can be found in the Social Sciences Proceedings on the Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science tab.

Institutional repositories

Most major research universities use institutional repositories to store records of their scholarly work. Institutional repositories are sometimes also used to disseminate research. They are valuable to researchers for various reasons:

• Free access to details of research carried out in your area.
• Free access to details of research carried out by particular researchers.
• Research papers may be available free of charge.
• Content can be found by internet search engines such as Google.

Pure  is our institutional repository. For other repositories search the Directory of Open Access Repositories .

• << Previous: Manchester Theses
• Next: Worldwide theses >>
• Last Updated: Oct 7, 2022 3:07 PM
• URL: https://subjects.library.manchester.ac.uk/theses

Start to finish: Dissertations

With a little help from my learning essentials, online resources.

• Planning your dissertation
• Choosing your dissertation topic
• Getting started with literature reviews
• Start to finish: Searching
• Start to finish: Searching systematically The resources on this page are aimed at students conducting systematic reviews.
• Organising and writing your literature review
• Critical reading: getting the most out of your reading
• Academic writing: referencing in your writing
• Proofreading: the final stage before submission

Student blogs

• Dissertation Experience: Tips for researching and writing your dissertation

Downloadable templates

• Writing your research objectives [PDF]
• How can you refine your research question? [PDF]
• Literature review map [Word] or [Word text only]
• Structure outline for essays [PDF]

Follow us on Twitter to keep up to date with our latest news, and let us know what other areas you'd like us to cover!

School of Arts, Languages and Cultures

Writing dissertations

The purpose of the activities in this section is to enable you to produce an effective dissertation, in accordance with the academic writing conventions followed at British universities. You will learn about the different parts of a dissertation and how they relate to each other. You will also have the opportunity to consider different writing styles and choose the most appropriate for your subject area. Finally, you will consider the importance of developing your own study skills and explore some useful dissertation writing tips and techniques.

What is a dissertation?

In this subsection, you will examine the overall structure of a dissertation and the common information elements found in each part. You will also reflect upon a number of important factors that need to be considered when selecting a topic for your dissertation.

Defining a dissertation and its structure

In this activity you will consider, the difference between a thesis and a dissertation. You will also identify different types of research and consider how the type of research affects the overall organisational pattern of the dissertation.

• View defining a dissertation and its structure activity

The elements of a dissertation

You will identify the information elements that the different chapters of a dissertation are likely to include. The numbering system that is typically employed for different sections of a dissertation is introduced.

• View the elements of a dissertation activity

Selecting a topic for your dissertation

Here you will explore the factors which will help you select a topic for your dissertation.

• View selecting a topic for your dissertation activity

Focusing on a topic

Here you will learn about techniques that can help you focus on a topic for your dissertation: creating mindmaps, formulating and refining research questions, and developing strategies for reading efficiently.

Brainstorming and mindmaps

You will practise using the techniques of brainstorming and creating mind maps to explore the possible areas you wish to cover in your dissertation.

• View brainstorming and mindmaps activity

Research questions and hypotheses

Here you will find out how to formulate and refine research questions. The meaning of the term hypothesis is also discussed.

• View research questions and hypotheses activity

Accessing and organising the literature for the dissertation 

You will explore effective ways to search for information and read efficiently. You will also find out how to manage, organise and record the literature that you access.

• View accessing and organising the literature for the dissertation activity

Research proposals, dissertation titles and personal journals

In this subsection you will identify the important elements in a research proposal, practise ways of writing an effective dissertation title, and explore the benefits of keeping a personal journal as part of the research process.

Writing a research proposal for a dissertation

Here you will examine the important information elements that should be included in a research proposal.

• View the writing a research proposal for a dissertation activity

Writing an effective title for your dissertation

You will find out how to write an effective title for your dissertation and how to present your title page.

• View writing an effective title for your dissertation activity

Keeping a research journal or diary

You will explore the value of keeping a research journal whilst conducting your research.

• View keeping a research journal or diary activity

The literature review

Different aspects of a dissertation literature review are explored. You will investigate the multiple purposes for which sources are cited in a literature review, explore different techniques for integrating sources into your text, consider the meaning of criticality in a literature review, and learn about strategies for giving your own voice prominence in your writing.

The multiple purposes of a literature review

This looks at how a literature review can be structured. It also considers the variety of purposes for which the related literature is used in a dissertation.

• View the multiple purposes of a literature review activity

Integrating sources

Different citation practices are introduced and the variety of ways in which the literature can be integrated into a text are considered.

• View integrating sources activity

Establishing your own position

You will learn about the organisational and linguistic techniques you can use to establish your own position in relation to the literature you are citing.

• View establishing your own position activity

How to be critical in a literature review

Here, the meaning of 'being critical' in a literature review is explored.

• View how to be critical in a literature review activity

Making linguistic choices

You will examine some of the linguistic strategies you can use to show your strength of commitment to the work you are citing.

• View making linguistic choices activity

Here, the different purposes of dissertation abstracts are considered. You will identify the common information elements in abstracts and the tense and voice changes that often occur in the text.

The purposes of a dissertation abstract

The various purposes of abstracts are explored. You will also analyse two abstracts to identify the different information elements which can be included.

• View the purposes of a dissertation abstract activity

Choices of verb tense and voice in different parts of an abstract

You will look at the changes in verb tense and voice that are likely to occur in an abstract and consider the reasons for these choices.

• View choices of verb tense and voice in different parts of an abstract activity

Writing and revising a draft abstract

Here you will have the opportunity to write a draft for your own dissertation abstract while considering the common information elements, as well as tense and voice choices.

• View writing and revising a draft abstract activity

Introductions

This subsection explores different aspects of a dissertation introduction. It focuses on its various functions, the common information elements it contains and its organisational structure. The differences between the dissertation introduction, abstract and literature review are also examined.

The purpose of an introduction and different information elements

You will focus on the purposes of dissertation introductions, their common information elements and their organisational structure.

• View the purpose of an introduction and different information elements activity

Abstracts and introductions

The differences between a dissertation abstract and introduction are examined.

• View the abstracts and introductions activity

The relationship between the introduction and the literature review

Here the difference between an introduction and a literature review is discussed. You will also look at examples of how the initial chapters of a dissertation can be organised.

• View the relationship between the introduction and the literature review activity

Research methodology

Here you will be introduced to the methodology section of a dissertation. The typical information elements and possible organisational structures will be presented. You will also focus on using appropriate verb tense and voice when describing your methodology.

Typical information elements when describing your methodology

You will be introduced to the methodology section of a dissertation and consider what information elements are typically included. You will then read four extracts and be given practice in identifying different elements. You will consider the different ways that methodology sections can be organised.

• View the typical information elements when describing your methodology activity

Common tense choice and voice choices

You will be given practice in choosing appropriate verb forms to complete short extracts which describe the methodology.

• View common tense choice and voice choices activity

Presenting and discussing findings

In this subsection, you are introduced to the various ways in which findings can be presented in dissertations. In particular, this section will cover the difference between the presentation of findings in a dissertation based on empirical research and in a library-based dissertation. You will also examine techniques for integrating tables and figures into a text.

Presenting findings from empirical research studies

You will explore the various ways in which research findings can be presented in a dissertation.

• View presenting findings from empirical research studies activity

Including tables and figures in your dissertation

Here important techniques for integrating figures and tables into a text are presented.

• View including tables and figures in your dissertation activity

Presenting findings in library-based dissertations

You will look at examples from library-based dissertations which illustrate the way findings are integrated into these types of text.

• View presenting findings in library-based dissertations activity

Interpretation and discussion

This subsection examines approaches to the discussion and interpretation of findings. The session includes an overview of the common information elements in the Discussion chapter of a dissertation, an analysis of the different meanings of interpretation, and practice in techniques for expressing different degrees of certainty in your writing.

Common elements in discussion chapters

You will consider the different ways in which you can organise the final chapters of your dissertation. The common information elements of the Discussion chapter of a dissertation are presented and explored.

• View common elements in discussion chapters activity

Different ways of interpreting findings

You will explore the various meanings of interpretation and analyse examples in texts.

• View different ways of interpreting findings activity

Expressing degrees of certainty 

You will practise the various language techniques available for expressing different degrees of certainty about your findings and interpretations.

• View expressing degrees of certainty activity

Conclusions and dissertation writing techniques

In this final subsection, you will examine the role of the conclusion in a dissertation and its links to other sections. Typical information elements will be presented. You will also focus on the need for cross referencing within a dissertation. You will consider a number of general techniques which will help you throughout your dissertation.

Conclusions

You will consider the role of a conclusion in a dissertation and how it is linked to other sections. You will also look at the different information elements often found in a conclusion.

• View conclusions activity

Cross referencing between dissertation chapters 

You will look at how authors refer back to previously given information within a dissertation and consider why it is necessary to cross reference in longer texts.

• View cross referencing between dissertation chapters activity

Time management, dealing with writer's block and revision strategies

Here you will focus on the importance of planning your time carefully during your dissertation. You will then be introduced to a number of strategies to help you keep writing. Finally, you will think about the importance of proof reading your work and making revisions.

• View time management, dealing with writer's block and revision strategies activity

• MyManchester
• Faculty StaffNet

• PGR handbook - Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health

Writing up and submitting your research

You can find up-to-date guidance on submitting your thesis on the Doctoral Academy website:

• Thesis submission

The guidance includes information on:

• plagiarism and referencing
• how to format and present your thesis
• using a journal format for your thesis
• electronic submission
• submission deadlines, including submission pending
• thesis binding
• the viva/oral exam
• getting your result.

Presentation of thesis

The University has a specific format required for PGR theses. You will find this detailed in the Presentation of Theses Policy .

If you have queries about presentation, you can ask staff in the Doctoral Academy , or ask them to have a look at a draft document.

Traditional and journal thesis formats

You may hear your supervisors or other PGRS talk about the different types of thesis format that are accepted for examination at Manchester.

These are currently defined as 'standard' and 'journal' format, although you shouldn't get too concerned about the terminology used. One format is not inherently better or more widely regarded than the other.

The standard thesis will have an introduction, literature review, materials and methods, results and discussion and conclusion, references and appendices.

The journal format thesis comprises chapters that have been written in the form of journal papers.

These may be papers that have been submitted to a journal, already accepted and published or chapters that are written as journal papers but are not yet or even are not intended to be submitted.

The advantage of this format is that it gives you the experience of writing in journal paper format. This format is increasingly popular in some disciplines, and yet may not be appropriate for all projects. Your supervisory team is the best place to start discussing your thoughts on this.

There is no requirement to request permission to submit in journal format. However, it is important that you discuss the relative merits of this format with your supervisory team, and ensure that you pick the right format for you and your project. Further guidance is available in Journal Format Theses - Guiding Principles for Students and Staff (PDF).

Submission pending

• Three-year PhD, MD and part-time - 12 months
• MPhil and 3.5-year PhD - 6 months

If you are a PGR on one of the programmes above and you do not submit by the end of programme, you may be able to register for the submission pending period.

You will need to have completed all your research (such as data collection and experiments) and should have a draft of the thesis completed (usually 80% of chapters in a reasonable draft form).

Your Student Support Administrator will provide details on registering for submission pending and paying the fee (£225 in the 2023/24 academic year).

You should be aware that during this writing up period, you are not considered to be a full-time PGR at the University.

You will still have access to facilities and your supervisory team will continue to support you towards submission of the thesis and preparation for the oral examination (as appropriate).

Once you enter submission pending, you may be returning to full-time work or be involved in a number of external activities that will reduce the amount of time that you have to spend on writing your thesis.

Please note that due to HMRC requirements, the University cannot make stipend payments to a PGR during the submission pending period.

Submission deadlines

It is important for your career development that you submit your thesis within the period of your programme as set out in your initial offer letter.

If you are eligible to use the submission pending period, remember that it will be increasingly difficult to find time to dedicate to completing your thesis once you are in full-time work.

Your final submission deadline will be stated on your original offer letter. If you are granted any periods of interruption or an extension to your programme, you will be notified of any change in your final submission deadline in the letter confirming this change to programme.

You will also see your submissions deadline displayed in eProg ('Thesis Submission Deadline' on the 'My Profile' page).

Extensions to final submission deadlines

Extensions to your final submission deadline will only be considered in exceptional circumstances and where permission is sought at least two months prior to the final submission deadline. Visit the Forms page on the Doctoral Academy website for the relevant forms to complete.

You will need to provide clear, documented evidence as to how your mitigating circumstances have impacted your ability to meet the deadline. Examples of appropriate exceptional circumstances can be found within the policy on circumstances leading to changes to postgraduate research study .

It is expected that your mitigating circumstances will have occurred within the submission pending period, or the last 12 months of a four-year programme.

Should your request for an extension to the final submission deadline be rejected, you will have the right of appeal.

Please note that even if you submit an appeal, you should still submit your thesis for examination by the final submission deadline.

Oral examination/viva

An integral part of the PhD/MD process is the oral examination (viva). This will take place at Manchester with your internal and external examiner.

The Academic and Researcher Development Team provide courses on preparing for this examination, and you will also receive guidance from your supervisory team on what to expect.

MPhil PGRs may have to undertake an oral examination, and this will be determined by the examiners following initial review of the thesis.

You may find it useful to refer to the full University policies on PGR examination .

Examiner recommendations

• A (i) no corrections
• A (ii) subject to minor corrections (four weeks to complete, exceptionally up to 12 weeks can be granted for completion of minor corrections)
• B (i) permitting submission of a revised thesis without further research and without further oral examination (six months to complete)
• B (ii) permitting submission of a revised thesis without further research but with a further oral examination (six months to complete, exceptionally up to 12 months)
• B (iii) permitting submission of a revised thesis with further research and with a further oral examination (12 months to complete)
• C (i) but award the degree of MPhil
• C (ii) award the degree of MPhil subject to minor corrections (four weeks to complete, exceptionally up to 12 weeks)
• C (iii) advising that the thesis be submitted, after revision, for examination for the degree of Master (six months to complete)
• C (iv) not permitting resubmission
• Your programme

FBMH 2021-22

Student Handbooks

Dissertation Handbook Masters in Public Health and Masters of Research Public Health/Primary Care 

Academic Year 2021/22

This handbook is for those of you embarking on the 60 credit dissertation of the MPH or the 90 credit dissertation of the MRes in Public Health/Primary Care. Refer to Blackboard MPH Programme Community / Dissertation and Critical Review for additional guidance and support. Use this handbook in conjunction with the Programme Handbook ( MPH and MRes ) and Faculty/University regulations .

Important Contacts

Introduction.

This handbook accompanies the main MPH/MRes Programme Handbook and other programme and University information. It is essential that students understand the requirements and expectations as set out in these documents, to support their academic studies. Please be aware that the requirements, pathways and options regarding the dissertation have changed for existing and new students at the start of September 2021 . These changes are included in this Handbook. Additional resources provided in Blackboard/ MPH Programme Community /Dissertation and Critical Literature Review. Be sure you understand the following:

Online resources

An introduction to the dissertation is given as part of the programme Induction .

There is a section in Blackboard in the MPH Community Space that provides further information and resources with regards to the dissertation. We strongly recommend ALL students explore the range of resources that we have created for them in this part of Blackboard/MPH Programme Community/Dissertations and Critical Literature Review.

Online tutorials/webinars

Students starting their dissertation or Critical Literature Review are encouraged to attend the following. The value of these sessions will be increased as more students participate directly. Sessions will be recorded but please make every effort to attend some of these. The Masterclass Series will be of direct value to MPH/MRes students:

The sessions below will focus on more generic study-skills workshops relevant to key milestones in the dissertation/critical literature review.

Please note that occasionally it may be necessary to change times at short notice. Therefore it is important that students check their university emails and the Announcements section in Blackboard and the Dissertation discussion board found in Blackboard/MPH Programme Community/Discussion Boards.

MPH vs. MRes

To complete the requirements for an MPH or MRes, students need to accomplish a pass across 180 credits. The balance between dissertation and course units required is shown below:

Intended Learning Outcomes

What is a master’s dissertation.

A master’s dissertation is a focused, critical and reflective body of writing that seeks to add to the understanding and knowledge of a particular problem or question. It is an opportunity for you to expand your knowledge and expertise in an area of study. To pass your dissertation, you will need to show your ability to provide in-depth, critical and reflective thinking, relevant to the focus of the dissertation. It is your own work and not that of your supervisor . The role of your supervisor is to support your learning experience but not to do the thinking for you. Appendix X shows an example of a marking framework currently used to assess dissertations.

In the UK, the requirements for a master’s degree are defined by the Quality Assurance Higher Education Agency. The following insert includes those sections of particular relevance to your dissertation. You will see the emphasis on the need to demonstrate critical application and reflection.

Types of Dissertations

The MPH/MRes programme aims to address the needs of public health professionals now and in the future. Reflecting this, along with student feedback, the dissertation unit includes a number of different approaches with regards to the type of dissertation and methodology. Further guidance on these is given in the Appendices. The different approaches (sometimes referred to as options or framework) are:

Note that all of the options are suitable for both quantitative and qualitative methods. Students are encouraged to read the detail given in the Appendices for all of the possible options, as some of the information will be helpful for more than one. Each option is marked using the same grading categories, and one is not easier than another (although of course, students differ in terms of their abilities, and like any assignment, will find some easier to complete than others).

Marking Framework

Appendix X provides information regarding the marking framework and guidelines. This is exactly as what will be given to the examiners. At the beginning of the unit it is helpful for students to understand the marking criteria and allocation of marks for a completed dissertation. This will enable students to develop a better sense and understanding of what they need to produce in order to pass, and achieve a higher mark. The Appendices include information about the criteria associated with different marking bands, and an example of a specific marking sheet. The mark sheet will how the total marks available for a dissertation are divided across a number of different categories. This information applies to both MPH and MRes students.

External partner project opportunities

Each year there are a limited number of opportunities for MPH or MRes students to undertake a dissertation project with either a researcher based in the team at The University of Manchester, or one of our external partners.

The partner project initiative is coordinated by Greg Williams ( [email protected] ) and Christine Greenhalgh ( [email protected] ) If you are interested in working with a researcher, or an external partner for your dissertation then please contact both of them at the earliest opportunity. There are only a limited number of places available each year and these cannot be guaranteed .

Researchers or external partners may be able to provide you with research ideas, data and/or access to expert practitioners. You will still be allocated a University of Manchester supervisor to oversee your dissertation and must follow all guidance as outlined in this handbook in addition to the standard university regulations as part of your programme as a whole.

To give you an example of the kind of opportunities that may be available, our external partners in the year 2020-21 have been:

• Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Partnership / Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust
• Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
• Public Health England
• The TRUUD Consortium

It is the intention for additional partners, including international partnerships to be added in due course.  Information on these will be available through the usual student communications. We are also happy to look for potential partnerships based on your interests/skills, where we may already have an ongoing relationship.

Partnership projects – things to consider

It is worth considering that depending on the partner and the project proposal, some additional, potentially time-consuming, requirements may need to be addressed. For instance, a data sharing agreement, data storage needs, and/or ethical approvals. While none of these issues would preclude you from undertaking a project, they may mean that such a project is not right for you.

Although the partnership projects can be a great opportunity for you to make external connections and produce work that is of value beyond your dissertation, it is important to remember that your dissertation is the number one priority. This means that any unforeseen circumstances, such as delays in data collection, must be thought about in your planning and cannot be used as mitigating circumstances . Remember that organisations may have different competing priorities to yours and timescales might end up being different to those initially agreed. Therefore students need to ensure that they will be able to adopt their initial ideas into a suitable dissertation, even if changes in the partnership relationship and priorities change over this period . The academic supervisor can help guide and suggest possible solutions such as recommending a change in the format of the dissertation to accommodate any challenges and necessary changes

Please make contact with Greg and Christine to discuss this further.

Research Ethics and Governance

ALL dissertation students and their supervisors need to adhere to correct research governance, and research ethics. Detailed information is given on the University website at University ethical approval | The University of Manchester

Students and their supervisors are responsible for ensuring that the correct governance (including ethics) approval has been secured and then adhered to as research is carried out. Some of these requirements are not just for students collecting new data (primary research), but apply to analysis of existing data too. Even a research grant proposal option would need a section dedicated to this topic.

Three sources for external information include:

Information Commissioner’s Office

NHS Health Research Authority

Medical Research Council information on good research practice

Research Ethics Online Decision Tool

All students need to use the online ethics decision tool to determine if their work will require ethical approval. A screenshot of the final decision from this decision tool (it does not produce a document) needs to be taken and included in an Appendix in the submitted dissertation: – UREC Decision Tool

Students also need to submit evidence that they sought permission to access and use any data and information from within a specific organisation, even if formal ethical approval is not required. This applies if the information is not in the public domain (but see the sections above if it is to do with NHS or equivalent data, or data considered to be ‘sensitive’ in nature) . This needs to be from a Director / senior manager, on letter headed paper, signed and sent as a PDF to the students’ academic supervisor. It is good practice for a copy of this to be included in an Appendix in their dissertation.

The key message is – all students need to ensure they understand and adhere to the international principles of good research conduct. Therefore students need to read the information on ethics and governance on the main university webpage, and then complete the UREC Decision Tool.

When must students start the dissertation unit?

• Full-time students start along with the individual taught units, towards the beginning of the academic year. Students often spend a few weeks settling into the programme, before submitting ideas for the dissertation (see Section Submitting Ideas).
• Part-time students on the 2 year route start in their second year.
• Part-time students on the 3-5 year route will normally start their dissertation after successful completion of their taught units (8 units for MPH and 6 units for MRes).

Deadline for submitting the completed dissertation

All students must submit their completed dissertation in the first week in September at the end of the academic year within which they registered to start the dissertation unit. Note that the academic year runs from September to September. Therefore, full time and part time students starting the dissertation in the academic year September 21/22 must meet the final submission date of 12:00 noon BST on Monday the 05th of September 2022.

Process Flow Chart

The following figure shows the route through the dissertation year. Note that once a student registers to start the dissertation unit, they must submit by the forthcoming September.

Do not leave it too late

Submitting your ideas

Students need to complete a short proposal form to indicate the title and a very brief outline of what they will be focusing on. There are five fixed dates when students can submit the proposal form. Proposals will not be processed between these dates. These dates reflect the academic timetable, and help account for assessment times and holidays. However, make sure you plan as much time as possible for working on your actual dissertation. The earlier you start in the academic year, the better.

Proposal Form Submission Dates

The following table shows the dates available for students to submit their dissertation proposal, explained above.

Academic Supervision 

Students will be allocated an academic supervisor soon after completing the process above. Students then need to make contact with, and introduce themselves to their allocated supervisor.

Role of the Supervisor

The role of the supervisor is to support a student’s academic development. Remember the dissertation is the work of the student and not that of the supervisor. Students will have different needs for support and guidance. Some of the areas a supervisor might help with include:

• Helping students to develop a meaningful time plan for the months ahead
• Supporting the development of the structure of the dissertation in terms of sections and themes that it includes
• Giving constructive feedback on sections of written work/preliminary drafts. This includes feedback on the general style of writing, appropriate use of references, and the depth of critique/appraisal that the work contains and relevance to the original aims and objectives of the work

In addition:

• Supervisors aim to give feedback to students within 2 weeks of submitting drafts. As a result, it is important that students plan their time and allow for the return time for feedback on their work
• Please do not expect supervisors to be able to give feedback very close to the submission date. Also, this would not provide enough time for students to respond to their comments
• Supervisors are expected to provide around 20 hours of support for dissertation students. This includes reviewing student drafts and individual meetings.

N.B Supervisors are asked to let students know if they will be taking annual leave in August/early September. This will help students plan their work and when supervisory support can be provided. It is a good idea for students to clarify this with their supervisor.

Maximising Supervision

Students are encouraged to maximise the opportunities for support from their academic supervisor. A few suggestions to facilitate this include:-

• Send supervisors an email as a way of introduction, a time plan, and any immediate concerns/support needs
• Identify specific queries or questions as a way of preparing for a discussion/meeting with the supervisor
• Have a good awareness of the marking template used to assess the final written work (see end of document). Knowing the assessment criteria helps guide a student’s work and supervisory discussion
• Make the supervisor aware of any difficulties affecting the ability to study. Students do not need to specify the detail, but enough to help the supervisor signpost the student to other sources of support. At the same time, it is helpful for any students with issues impacting on their studies, to let [email protected] know.
• Raise any issues associated with supervision by contacting [email protected] or [email protected]

Additional support

All students are encouraged to utilise the My Learning Essentials packages provided through the online UoM library. There are also helpful resources provided in the MPH Programme Community relevant to both the dissertation and the Critical Literature Review.

Students are strongly encouraged to draft and share a plan for the academic year with their supervisor. This will help them to develop a realistic understanding of the amount of time required to achieve key milestones over the months ahead. Working back from the final submission date is a good way to appreciate what needs to be done, to meet the final submission date.

Always let [email protected] and your supervisor know of issues impeding your studies so that they can make a record and provide support.  

Word Counts

The dissertation has a word count limit, specified as a range. This differs for the MPH and the MRes as shown below:-

• As a general guide, the Abstract needs to be around 300 words
• The student needs to indicate the final word count , at the top of the cover (first page) page the dissertation. This will be based on the inclusions and exclusions as described below. Breaching the upper word limit can incur penalties and marks can be deducted

Inclusions, Exclusions & Penalties

Detailed information about word counts, what is and is not included, marking penalties and the marking framework used for assessment, is given in the Appendices .

Dealing with your own publications/presentations

Students are encouraged to disseminate work associated with their academic studies, including the dissertation. This can include publications in printed and online journals, blogs, textbooks and conference presentations. However, steps need to be taken to avoid academic malpractice. Before submitting a dissertation, it is important for students to reference any publication (or work formally accepted for publication) that directly relates to the dissertation. This means students will need to reference their own published/presented work, if aspects of this are included in the dissertation. Failing to do so puts the student at risk of academic malpractice, including plagiarism. Furthermore, students must not directly copy and use the same material in their dissertation that is presented in a publication

Use of appendices in the dissertation

Information in the appendices is not marked by the examiner and is not included in the word count. Therefore, whatever you include in the appendices must not form a considerable component of the dissertation itself and no marks are attached to these.

However, for a dissertation, it can be of general interest to include items that are indirectly related to the main body of the dissertation. For example:

• A copy of a questionnaire created by the student (but this would not be marked)
• A copy of the complete data analysis output (such as from Stata/SPSS) (but this would not be marked)
• A copy of the full search strategy as used in Ovid, Pubmed, etc. (but this would not be marked). However, students will still need to evidence of the results of your actual search in the main part of the dissertation. This is to show how successful your search was, the type of information/studies retrieved, and the number. This is especially important when conducting a systematic review, but applicable to other dissertation formats too.

As the appendices are not marked , students must ensure that information central to the dissertation is included in the main part of the written sections. Therefore, with regard to the three examples in the list above, more specific detail and explanation might be better placed in the main part of the dissertation, otherwise it would not be included in the formal marks.

Formatting/layout

The University has a number of important requirements regarding the way in which the written dissertation is laid out. For the main text, double or 1.5 spacing with a minimum font size of 12 must be used; single-spacing may be used for quotations, footnotes and references. A number of preliminary pages need to be included too, specific to the programme of study..

Adhering to a clear and consistent presentation format can facilitate the marking process and students can lose valuable marks if their presentation is poor. The examples of previous dissertations, included in Blackboard, can help direct students to appropriate styles to use.

Further guidance for the presentation of dissertations is available here .  

About the author

Students are encouraged to include a short section in the preliminary section called ‘About the author’ – writing a couple of paragraphs about the student’s background/current role, helps the marker see a bigger picture. However, it does not influence the marks awarded/adherence to the marking framework

Referencing

The use of referencing will be assessed by the examiners. On this programme, the preferred referencing style is Harvard . However, Vancouver is acceptable. Students must correctly reference their work. Poor approaches to referencing can suggest academic malpractice. Guidance can be found on academic writing and referencing in the Study Skills course within the MPH Programme Community space in Blackboard and from the University My Learning Essentials.

It is essential that students develop the referencing they write their dissertation. There are a number of free online and cloud-based programmes to facilitate this process (including Endnote and Mendeley). Please ensure that the final reference list is produced correctly, especially if you are using an automated process, through Endnote/Mendeley for example. Sometimes software can cause final problems with this as part of the upload process. Therefore producing a final .PDF document might be preferable.

Students need to submit one electronic copy of the dissertation through Blackboard (similar to a course unit assignment). Printed copies of the dissertation are not needed .

Where to submit

The place to submit the electronic copy is in Blackboard in the MPH Programme Community space under My Communities . This is indicated in the diagram below:-

All students are encouraged to consider ways to disseminate aspects of their work. This can include a blog post, presentation, or more formal dissemination such as publication in an academic journal. This can also enhance a student’s CV and contribute to their career development. A publication could take on any number of formats including:

• A commentary/editorial
• A study report
• A case report
• A letter to the editor

Publishing/presenting your work

Students can discuss potential publication with Roger Harrison/Andrew Jones. They will have ideas about the suitability of your work, the relevant journals, and what aspects to focus on. Students can also ask if their supervisor could help with this work, although that is outside of the main supervision role.  Students are asked to acknowledge in any dissemination that the work was associated with the MPH/MRes. We are always keen to know what/how students do in relation to their MPH/MRes. Therefore, please send information regarding any successful publications, even if that occurred after graduation, to [email protected] Further, information on any career progression or grant funding, that was influenced by the MPH/MRes, is always good to hear about.

Appendix I – Research Grant Proposal

This option is likely to appeal to students who have identified the need for a particular area of research or those keen to develop a research project after completing their postgraduate degree. It may also be helpful for students looking to start a research focused course of study in the future (such as a PhD). Some aspects of this option will reflect the requirements for formal proposals such as those to the Medical Research Council (MRC) or the Economic & Social Research Council (ESRC). Remember that you will be assessed against the marking framework included as an appendix in this handbook. Therefore, your dissertation will need to contain appropriate critical appraisal and reflective thinking at appropriate sections in the dissertation.

The course units Practical Statistics for Population Health, Fundamentals of Epidemiology, Evidence Based Practice, Qualitative Research Methods and Economic Evaluation in Healthcare may be of particular relevance to this option. 

This can apply to Quantitative AND Qualitative methodology and likely to consist of three broad sections, broken down into individual chapters.

A) Lay Abstract. The Research Grant Proposal will need to have a Lay Abstract in replacement of a more academic/scientific abstract. The suggested word count for abstracts is 300 words. Resources for examples are included here:

(a) How to Write a Lay Summary | DCC

(b) How to write a lay summary – research grants | BHF

B) Case for support . This section needs to show:

i) Why does this particular research need to be done?

ii) Why should resources be dedicated to this topic and what gaps in knowledge does the research seek to address?

iii) How might it lead to an improvement in a particular setting/context/population?

You will clearly formulate the problem, setting it in context of scientific and/or theoretical debates. You need to show how it is relevant to trying to improve the health of a particular group of people or locality. This section will include a detailed critique of existing literature relating to the topic and bring in other information to highlight the case for support. You will acknowledge and critique existing studies or data sources and explain the problems with these – in other words, why more research is needed. It is important to reflect on the implications of the proposed research in terms of future healthcare policy/planning or interventions and how it might benefit potential users of your findings. Thus you could include at some point in the dissertation a clear dissemination policy of your findings.

C) Research/study methods. The detailed study design must be directly related to your stated primary and secondary objectives and capable of answering the proposed research question. Whilst you are not asked to go on and do the actual study, the proposal must be related to current circumstances and existing evidence – it must be a study design that could actually be carried out in practice. You will give a clear rationale for the particular elements of the research project, using appropriate references to support specific parts of your study design. For example, your methods of sampling (if relevant) and evidence to support the sample size for the project need to be clearly justified. Similarly you need to justify your choice of data collection methods/measurement tools, and what can be expected in terms of response rates. Part of the study design will include an analysis plan of your collected data. It is not sufficient to just say that “methods suitable for continuous data will be used” for example – you need to give a detailed plan and again support your methods.

• A section on resources/costings is required . Here you need to provide information on the direct costs to carry out the research project. For example, how many community workers will interview people and how much will it cost to employ them? This section must be realistic, set in a particular context/country and where possible, supported with evidence. This will coincide with a detailed time plan which can be helpful to present as a Gantt chart.
• All research needs to follow accepted ethical principles such as the Declaration of Helsinki and research governance. Whilst these may vary across different countries, remember that your final postgraduate award (if successful) is from the University of Manchester – as such you would be expected to show your understanding and application of research ethics and governance expected from research conducted in the United Kingdom and apply this as appropriate to your own setting. This will include an assessment of risks to different stakeholders and how you have tried to minimise any risks, including contingency plans, in your research design.

D) Discussion. The discussion section is one of the most important parts of any dissertation. Here you need to reflect on the relevance/importance of your research question and of your proposed research design. This can bring in some of the wider literature/evidence to develop arguments to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of your proposed research. You can discuss and reflect on some aspects of the study design, including a critique of your methods, and show how you have tried to use rigorous methods for your research that reflect the body of existing knowledge in that area. Research rarely goes to plan and you can show how you have considered some of the potential difficulties in completing the research and how you have tried to overcome these in your proposal. Whilst you will not have any actual findings to discuss, you can postulate what these might be and the implications of a positive or null-finding from your research in terms of service delivery/health policy for example.

Other sections are likely to include references, appendices etc.

Please note that the Marking Framework for this option includes one difference to that used for all the other dissertations: because there will not be any ‘results’, the marks allocated for this on other dissertation frameworks, have been added to the criteria sections ‘Design of the study’ and ‘Discussion’.

Bibliography.

Chapman, S & Mcneill, P. (2003). Research Methods . London. Routledge.  

Bowling, A. (2011). Research Methods in Health: investigating health and health services. Buckingham. Open University Press.

Crosby R. DiClemente RJ & Salazar LF. (2006). Research Methods in Health Promotion . San Francisco. Jossey-Bass.

Ulin, P, Robinson ET & Tolley EE. (2004). Qualitative Methods in Public Health: A Field Guide for Applied Research .  San Francisco. Jossey-Bass.

How to Write a Research Proposal

Medical Research Council – guidance on grant applications

The Economic & Social Research Council

Appendix II – A new research study/project

The dissertation provides an opportunity for MPH and MRes students to collect new, primary data (i.e. conduct a research study/project). This is of particular interest for students who intend to pursue a research-focused career, or one with a strong element of this within. The research study can be based on any suitable methodology but one which is agreed by the student’s supervisor

Embarking on a new research study/project can be a practically challenging task. All students need to do background work to ensure that the study can be completed within the timescales of the dissertation.

Students are responsible for establishing their own research study. However, this can be part of the partnerships, as discussed earlier in this handbook, or students can join an existing research programme that is running elsewhere.

Identifying and if relevant, gaining research ethical approval is a key criteria, and students will not be able to proceed unless this has been secured where needed. This will include ethical approval from the University of Manchester, in addition to that which might be needed outside of the university setting (e.g. for research within the context of the NHS).

Students wishing to pursue a primary research project will need to discuss their ideas and approach with Greg.Williams@Manchester or [email protected] in advance.

Additional guidance about the suitable research design, and structure for the dissertation can be gleaned from reading other sections in this handbook.

Appendix III – Quantitative Analysis of Existing Data

This option takes the format of a quantitative research project. It provides an opportunity for students to collect new, primary data (i.e. conduct a research study) or to analyse data from an existing data set to which they can access. For primary data you are likely to require ethics approval. For secondary data you must demonstrate permission to access and use the data for the purposes of your dissertation with a formal letter from the person/organisation responsible for the data. You will also need to provide assurance that any original consent attached to the data does not preclude you from using the data for your dissertation.

Sources of data are likely to include routine datasets/surveillance information, such as those accessed from the World Health Organisation (WHO) or national surveys such as the Health Survey for England. In some circumstances, you might have access to more locally based sources of data, such as routine statistics from a health care provider. It is also possible to use data from an established research project that you have been involved with.

The course units Practical Statistics for Population Health, and Fundamentals of Epidemiology, will be of particular relevance to this option.

A quantitative research report for the dissertation will include the following sections. These are usually presented in the form of individual chapters:

• Introduction, Background & Critical Review of Existing Literature . These sections will cover similar issues/areas to those highlighted in the Case for Support in the option of Research Grant Proposal, on the previous page.
• Methods & Study Design . You will need to provide a detailed plan, and justification for your proposed methods of analysis. In addition, you will need to provide a detailed description of the data set, including how the information was obtained, over what time period, using what methods, who was invited to participate and who actually took part. You will also need to be clear about the aims of the main data set/research project, AND of your specific aims that you are seeking to address in the dissertation. This will be followed by your proposal to answer those questions yourself using all or part of the dataset. In a way, you might be carrying out a study nested within a much larger information/research project. At some point in your dissertation you will need to give attention to the integrity of the data, and how reliable it might be.
• Analysis & Results . This will form a key part of your dissertation, along with the other sections. Before starting the analysis, you will need to spend time exploring and examining the data. You will need to check and report on data quality and any management required to present them in a workable format for your dissertation. Do not underestimate the time involved in the data cleaning and preparation stage. In the analysis you will need to justify any deviances to your original plan and be clear about any assumptions that you make. In presenting your results, think about the most effective ways to present and communicate your findings. Remember that you want to capture key findings from the study in a clear and meaningful way; otherwise the reader will find it difficult to identify what you found. However, there is a balance to be had in terms of the number of tables, charts and graphs. Focus on presenting what the reader needs to know and understand in relation to the original objectives. A key skill is in knowing what and how much needs to be presented by way of analysis output and results.
• Discussion The discussion section is one of the most important parts of any dissertation. Here you will reflect on the relevance/importance of your research question, the quality of your research findings, and set these into the current context of existing knowledge. You can bring in some of the wider literature/evidence to develop arguments to highlight the internal and external generalisability or strengths and weaknesses of your research and show what value can be placed on your actual findings. It is important to discuss the value of the existing data source and to consider alternative / superior ways to answer your research question in future. The discussion section usually includes consideration of the implications of your findings, particularly to health policy and practice. In other words, what recommendations might arise from your work. It is not uncommon to find dissertations and academic papers finishing with the phrase “more research is required” – this obvious statement conveys little information to the reader about what you actually know about the subject. If questions remain unanswered then provide some direction in terms of how they might be answered.

Bibliography

Bland M. (2000). An Introduction to Medical Statistics. Oxford. OUP. Statistics At Square One .

Chapman, S & Mcneill, P. (2003). Research Methods. London. Routledge.

Links Research Methods Knowledge Base Guidelines for Presenting Quantitative Data

Appendix IV – Full or Adapted Systematic Review

This can be of quantitative OR qualitative data

There are two core differences between the requirements for MPH and MRes students:

• MPH students are not expected to complete a full systematic search and review of the literature, largely because they have less time than MRes students. An adapted review refers to ways to produce a manageable amount of references (or potential references) for a single student to deal with in a less amount of time than MRes students
• MRes students are usually expected to complete a full systematic review.

Rationale for the ‘adapted’ approach

The option of completing an adapted systematic review provides an opportunity for MPH students to develop their skills in systematically collating, assessing and summarising existing sources of evidence. The amount of work involved can be influenced by the number of studies potentially eligible if it were a full, in-depth review (e.g. Cochrane Collaboration style). Consequently, for the purposes of this dissertation, MPH students can limit the number of studies in their review (see below).

The course units Practical Statistics for Population Health, Fundamentals of Epidemiology and Evidence Based Practice will be of particular relevance to this option.

Introduction/background : This is similar to the Case for Support described earlier in the Grant Proposal option.

Study design/methods including : You need to develop a suitable review methodology appropriate to your research question. The structure of the review is then likely to include:

• Clearly defined research question
• Definition of intervention
• Criteria for inclusion/exclusion of studies
• Definition of study populations
• Primary and secondary outcomes for the review
• Methods of analysis/summarising data
• Methods for assessing study quality
• Search strategy & sources of literature/information

Analysis / synthesis of results. Note that you are not expected to complete a meta-analysis for the dissertation though you can include one if appropriate.

Results including :

• Flow chart of search process/included & excluded studies
• Summary of data extraction
• Summary of included studies
• Assessment of methodological quality
• Summary of treatment effects

Discussion : this is likely to cover some of the areas/issues described in the proceeding dissertation option “Quantitative Research Report”

Other sections are likely to include conclusion, references, appendices etc. 

Dealing with too many or too few studies (MPH students)

Good quality search strategies for some research questions can identify hundreds, sometimes thousands of potentially eligible studies to be reviewed. MPH students are unlikely to have sufficient time to suitably deal with this. Consequently, it is possible to incorporate sensible approaches within the study design to limit the number of studies for the dissertation. For example:-

• Limiting the range of time (years) that publications will be considered eligible. Such as running a search from 2016-2021, as opposed to 1980-2021 (or whatever wider range would be used for a full and complete review).
• Restricting to a specific country/region (such as UK, or sub-Saharan Africa etc)
• Limiting to a specific population (e.g. just women, or by a specific age group).

The use of these approaches should be justified in terms of your review question. For example, an appropriate reason for date restriction could be to assess new evidence published since a Cochrane review or guideline, restricting to a specific country or group of countries could be justified by population demographics or healthcare structure and access. If you use one of these approaches then it needs to be clearly stated in the methods, results and discussion section.

In some cases, you might find less than a handful of potentially eligible studies for your review or none at all. This does not rule out conducting a systematic review for your dissertation though it can make it more challenging.

Working with a second reviewer (MPH and MRes)

You may know that a high quality systematic review is usually carried out by at least two reviewers. The main reason for this is to carry out independent screening and data extraction, as a way of confirming results and reducing selection bias.

Some students might be in a position to ‘recruit’ someone to act as a second reviewer. This would be necessary if the student wanted to publish their work. It can also provide an opportunity to enhance a student’s research and facilitation/team work skills. If this approach is taken, it is essential that this is transparent across the dissertation, and that the student is able to clearly identify what is their own academic work. In other words, whilst the second reviewer is largely carrying out task-based functions, the core of the dissertation itself needs to be the work of the student.

Akobeng, A.K. (2005) Understanding systematic reviews and meta-analysis, Arch.Dis.Child, vol. 90, no.8, pp.845-848 [online] .

Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions http://www.cochrane.org/training/cochrane – handbook/

Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in health care.  http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/pdf/Systematic_Reviews.pdf

Greenhalgh, T. (1997) Papers that summarise other papers (systematic reviews and meta-analyses), BMJ, vol. 315, no. 7109, 672-675 [online]

Appendix V – Academic Public Health Report

Many public health professionals will be expected to produce public health reports in relation to a particular issue/subject. On the MPH/MRes, these are prefixed as ‘Academic’ Public Health Reports, to ensure that students appreciate the need to apply scientific and evidence-based rigour, with academic critical and reflective argument throughout, and clear justification for approaches considered. This may differ to less detailed organisational reports at times. The course units Practical Statistics for Population Health, Fundamentals of Epidemiology and Evidence Based Practice will be of value for this option, but not restrictive to just these.

The format for an academic public health report will vary according to the topic/focus and primary objectives. The following acts as a general guide:

Aims: students need to demonstrate their appropriate understanding, application and critical reflection of theories/models and existing knowledge to inform a specific public health question, often focused on a particular locality/setting and to consider future interventions and policy direction.

Types of Reports: In most (but not all) situations, an academic public health report will be used to address certain aspects associated with an existing or pending problem in a specific area or context. The types of public health reports likely to be presented for a dissertation include:

• Health needs assessment / health impact assessment
• An audit / evaluation of service delivery
• An outbreak report
• Option appraisal
• Policy evaluation

Structure & objectives: The specific structure and objectives of the academic report will be influenced by its focus / initial public health question. But in all academic public health reports, students need to demonstrate their ability to appropriately use and understand the main skills and principles that have been covered across the MPH course. Students are encouraged to critically present and reflect on any existing or proposed policy relevant to the focus of the report. Thus, students need to be able to challenge the status quo or proposed policy direction set by organisations, local, national or international bodies & government.

The content of an academic public health report is likely to cover material from the following sections:

• To clearly identify, describe and present a public health issue, often focused on a particular locality / setting or population
• To present an analysis of the issue
• To use available data sources where possible to describe the actual possible burden or impact of the issue, including historical, current and future impact and to set this in relation to other key population characteristics and health issues. Data and information need to be presented in a meaningful way and appropriate to the focus of the report
• Recognising that there might be limited information on the specific issue in this setting, students need to find other sources of data to inform and estimate the possible circumstances. Rarely does a locally based public health problem arise without any suggestive or interpretative information from elsewhere which can then be used to inform the local picture.
• To set the issue in a relevant policy context, be it a specific local, national or international setting.
• To critically review literature relevant to the focus of your public health report. This can include critical reflection of evidence relating to epidemiology, interventions and policy. You will need to describe how you sourced or searched for evidence and information, why, and what methods you used to critically appraise the information.
• To identify and examine possible policy drivers and what or how these could influence the current/future situation; in some reports this may require the use of a formal policy review framework.

Interventions & recommendations

• The report must include a section examining possible interventions, changes to practice, or policy directions, which need to reflect on the principles of evidence based practice. The possible impact/expected change from these recommendations needs to be explored in relation to the specific issue.
• All interventions and recommendations need to be clearly linked to earlier sections in the report and you need to show what gaps/problems/ or issues, identified earlier, that they aim to resolve.
• To consider and propose relevant surveillance/monitoring or research to meet gaps you have identified and show how this could then be used to address / inform the issue.

Writing style

A number of different styles or frameworks can be used to present your academic public health report. Typically your work needs to follow a structured approach, making use of clearly labelled sections, headings and sub-headings. These will help you signpost the reader to various parts of the report as the work progresses, showing how different aspects are linked.

• Academic public health reports need to finish with a clear summary of the main features/points in your report and recommendations must clearly reflect the main body of the report.
• Students are not expected to carry out a full systematic review of the existing literature. But they do need to carry out a sensible and robust way to provide evidence on the burden, context, and possibly evidence of interventions, amongst other things. A description of the approach to source relevant literature needs to be included in the main part of the dissertation, and often this includes a summary of the search strategy from an online database.
• You need to explain and critically reflect on any methods used throughout your report. This includes those relevant to data/information seeking, appraisal, impact and review. Thus highlighting the relevance and strength of the information, to inform the specific issue.
• Think carefully about the structure and order of your report. There needs to be a common thread throughout the report and all sections need to be clearly linked to the initial issue presented.
• Avoid over use of bullet points and use complete sentences to present most of your work. Use meaningful charts, tables and figures – but there needs to be a clear reason for including these and a link to relevant text.
• If you are including an executive summary then there is no need to write an abstract as they are likely to contain very similar information. However, it is a requirement that dissertations have an abstract. Therefore we suggest that you simply use the executive summary for the abstract, but make sure that the main heading for that page is “Abstract” and then a subheading “Executive Summary”.

Chapman, S & Mcneill, P. (2003). Research Methods . London. Routledge.

Appendix VI – Outbreak Report

To be read in addition to the guidance on writing an Academic Public Health Report, in the previous pages. This option might be of interest to students working in a public health setting with an interest in examining a particular event or outbreak. A common approach would take:-

Introduction, background & setting : aims of the report; contextual information. Population profiles, surveillance data and a description of the site, area or facility under investigation.

Literature review including a description and critique of previous outbreaks

Outbreak methods :

• How was the outbreak discovered/reported?
• Steps taken to confirm it?
• What was known then?
• Why the investigation was undertaken?
• What were the objectives?
• Management of the outbreak?
• Who assisted in the investigation?
• What control measures were taken?

Discussion including: a critique of the outbreak investigation and methods; comparisons with similar outbreaks and previous studies; relevance of the results in the local context and other settings; recommendations and justification for any action needed.

Buehler JW et al. (2004) Framework for Evaluating Public Health Surveillance Systems for Early Detection of Outbreaks. MMRW. 53 (RR050; 1-11. http://www.cdc.gov/Mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5305a1.htm

Ungchusak K, Iamsirithaworn S. “Principles of Outbreak Investigation”. Chpt 6.4. In Oxford Textbook of Public Health. Volume 2. (2009).

Appendix VII – Qualitative/Theoretical Study

This option will appeal to students who have a particular interest in qualitative methods and research. It is likely that they will have taken the unit Qualitative Research Methods and encouraged to refer to the course curriculum to help develop their ideas. Types of approaches for this dissertation option include:

Metasynthesis: Students should choose a topic that has been previously researched via a number of published qualitative research studies and produce a metasynthesis.

Qualitative study using available data: Students might already have access to existing data. Or may want to make use of available data sources such as, ESDS Qualidata ( http://www.esds.ac.uk/qualidata/about/introduction.asp ) or the UK Data Service (https://www.ukdataservice.ac.uk/get-data/about.aspx)

Qualitative study involving primary data collection : Students will need to consider whether they will need ethical approval and the time taken to achieve both this and data collection. An early start date for this option is strongly recommended.

A theoretical review: Students would choose a topic of interest and address some theoretical questions by reviewing previous theoretical and empirical (where relevant) work.  Examples of topics that could be addressed in this way include:

• The social/ cultural construction of risk in relation to a number of health issues.
• The conceptualisation/ measurement of disability in relation to meeting health and social needs.

Policy or discourse analysis/content analysis: Students should choose a topic of interest where they can critically examine relevant texts. If the topic is a specific focus of policy strategies, then the study should include analysis of policy documents. Other texts that can be a focus of discourse analysis can include media sources such as visual imagery and newspaper commentary. A number of public health issues have been the focus of discourse analysis, such as ‘food scares’, the spread of infectious diseases such as HIV, and students could consult published studies of this type for ideas. Students would also need to consult specific texts on discourse analysis for this approach.

A critical policy review (public health/primary care) utilising a suitable approach such as Framework Analysis. This qualitative research tool is used extensively in applied policy research. The process of framework analysis has five main stages:

• Familiarization
• Identification of a thematic framework
• Mapping and interpretation

Qualitative research grant proposal

Students can also use qualitative methods as the focus for a research grant proposal, and simply follow the guidance specific to that approach described earlier in this handbook.

Clarke JN, Everest MM (2006). Cancer in the mass print media: Fear, uncertainty and the medical model. Soc. Sci. Med . 62 (10): 2591-2600.

Collins PA, Abelson J, Pyman H, Lavis JN (2006). Are we expecting too much from print media? An analysis of newspaper coverage of the 2002 Canadian healthcare reform debate. Soc.Sci.Med . 63 (1): 89-102.

Davin S (2003) Healthy viewing: the reception of medical narratives. Soc. Health & Illness. 25 (6): 662679.

Pilgrim D, Rogers AE (2005) Psychiatrists as social engineers: A study of an anti-stigma campaign. Soc. Sci. Med. 61 (12): 2546 – 2556.

Appendix VIII – Word Count and Late Penalties

Word count penalties for the dissertation will be applied as described in the Programme Handbook ( MPH or MRes ).

Word Count Inclusions

In accordance with accepted academic practice, when submitting any written assignment for summative assessment, the notion of a word count includes the following without exception:

• All titles or headings that form part of the actual text. This does not include the cover page or reference list (i.e. for a dissertation, the word count would start AFTER the Abstract ).
• All words that form the actual essay ( excluding the abstract and appendices)
• All words forming the titles for figures, tables and boxes, are included but this does not include boxes or tables or figures themselves
• All in-text (that is bracketed) references
• All directly quoted material

Word Count Exclusions

The following are excluded from the word count:-

• List of tables and figures
• Acknowledgements
• Declaration
• Intellectual property statement
• Text within tables and figures
• Bibliography/reference list

Late penalties for the dissertation will be applied as described in the Programme Handbook ( MPH or MRes ).

Appendix IX – MPH/MRes Programme Community Space

The MPH/MRes Programme Community space is the central place to access all programme-related resources and information and to communicate with other students across the programme.

It contains several essential courses, including:

Online Induction

The online induction course contains everything you need to get started on the programme by providing an introduction to, and overview of, the essential university systems and services. You must complete this short course before starting your studies.

Within the Online Induction course, you have the option to complete a Learning Needs Assessment. This questionnaire is to help you identify your own learning needs and to help us support you in achieving your goals. For further information on the way that The University of Manchester handles your information, please consult our student privacy notice .

Study Skills

The Study Skills course introduces you to a range of skills and resources required for developing practical and effective strategies for successful learning online. It includes topics on information searching, referencing and academic writing and requires you to complete the academic malpractice driving test.

Dissertations and Critical Literature Review

This part of Blackboard contains a range of resources to support dissertation students and those taking the option of a Critical Literature Review. It includes the calendar of workshops for Masterclasses and Tutorials for students at this stage in their studies.

Health and Safety Presentation

The university’s duty of care covers all its students, staff and visitors, including distance learning students who come onto campus for residential courses, study days or assessments. Although you will not spend much time on campus as a distance learner, there is some information you should know before you come. This short presentation tells you what to do in case of a fire or an accident while you are with us in Manchester. It should only take around 5 minutes to complete.

Both the academic malpractice driving test and health and safety presentation must be completed by 31 st October 2021

Appendix X – Marking Framework for 2021/22

Download the full dissertation examiner report form here ., appendix xi – core contacts (including technical support).

Technical Support

If you are having problems accessing My Manchester, email, your course materials, or you would like to discuss computer-related issues, please click the following link for 24 hour services:

http://bmh – elearning.org/technical – support/

If you are having difficulty with the electronic resources, you should contact the library via My Manchester.

IT Services Support Centre online

Details can be found at:   http://www.itservices.manchester.ac.uk/help/

Login to the Support Centre online to log a request, book an appointment for an IT visit, or search the Knowledge Base.

• Telephone: +44 (0)161 306 5544 (or extension 65544). Telephone support is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
• In person: Walk-up help and support is available at the Joule Library, Main Library or Alan Gilbert Learning Commons

Technical Help with Blackboard

If your Blackboard course unit is not behaving as you expect, you can contact:

• The Course Unit Leader by email to get help with content issues (missing notes, etc.)
• The eLearning team for technical bugs using the eLearning Enquiry button via the following link:

• Docs »
• Dissertation Format
• View page source

Dissertation Format ¶

All students must produce a thesis, which describes in full detail the wider context of the research field including a literature review, the motivation for the research, the research which was carried out, an evaluation of the results, and a discussion of the contribution made to the field by the research and what should be done in the future. This needs to be submitted by three days before the end of the fourth year. For the relevant University policies, see ‘Policies’ Chapter.

There are two formats in which the thesis can be produced: traditional format and alternative format. Traditional format is probably what most people imagine a thesis is like, a very substantial report presented as a self-contained exposition. The alternative format thesis “... allows a postgraduate doctoral or MPhil student to incorporate sections that are in a format suitable for submission for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.” [1] . The alternative format thesis is often thought of as a collection of publications, with a short commentary associated with each one, tying the works into a unifying thread, or “thesis”.

Which you use is a decision you will need to make with your supervisor .

The advantages of the alternative format thesis are that if you already have several papers, you can more easily produce a thesis out of them. Also, if you have plans to write several papers, you can write your thesis in such a way that it will be easier to facilitate these plans, because writing the thesis will be build around writing papers. The papers can be submitted after the thesis.

The disadvantage of the alternative format is that it is less widely used in the UK, so many supervisors and examiners may be less comfortable with it.

A QandA on the alternative format thesis can be found here http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/DocuInfo.aspx?DocID=15216 . Note that it says in Section 4,

“...it may not be until year 2 or 3 that you feel you are in a position to use the alternative format.”

but it says in Section 5 that a request must be made in writing by the end of year 2. Thus, if you are considering using alternative format, apply for it by the end of year 2 . You can revert to traditional format without asking permission formally.

Plagiarism ¶

All students should make sure they are familiar with what the university expects from its students. All students are also required to complete a plagiarism course.

In view of the serious consequences of plagiarism and academic malpractice, it is essential that all students familiarise themselves with the accepted format for referencing work in their discipline, and that they start using the accepted form as soon as possible.

Ignorance of the proper format, or ignorance of the definitions of plagiarism and academic malpractice used by the university, is not a valid defence against a possible claim of plagiarism or other instance of academic malpractice.

Writing Advice ¶

Whichever format you choose, you must give yourself sufficient time to produce the thesis. You must know yourself, and how quickly you are able to write. Six months is a minimum time for most people. Some may need nine.

Do not feel that you need to write it in order; start with the easiest parts first. Usually the technical sections on the research done by you are the easiest, because you know them well. The literature review may be next easiest. The introduction is usually the hardest to write, and many advise that it be written last.

• language Search for " " in the Library Website Search the library website
• menu_book Search for " " in Library Search Search Library Search
• The University of Manchester Library

eThesis submission: Journal format theses

A Journal format thesis allows you to incorporate sections that are in a format suitable for submission for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. If you wish to submit your thesis in journal format, you should discuss this with your supervisor, and declare your intention when you complete the Notice of Submission form. See also the University's Presentation of Theses policy for more information:

• Presentation of Theses Policy: http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/DocuInfo.aspx?DocID=7420

If you are submitting a Journal format eThesis, you should select this format in step 2 of 5 of the eThesis submission form.

• Screenshots of the eThesis submission system: http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/DocuInfo.aspx?DocID=32873

Preparing and submitting your journal format thesis

‘Self-archiving’ is where a researcher makes a piece of scholarly work available via a repository. The University’s Presentation of Theses policy requires that final Doctoral theses are ‘self-archived’ and made Open Access via the University’s systems within 12 months of submission, unless an exception to this policy is required.

The structure of a journal format thesis – being comprised of a number of research papers submitted to or published in academic journals – means that you as the author need to take extra care when preparing your thesis for submission, and selecting your preferred access level for your final thesis. For each publisher you’re working with, or plan to work with, you will need to establish what each allows and requires in terms of self-archiving of work, i.e.:

• If my publisher allows me to share my work via a repository, what version of my work can I share?
• When can I share my work via a repository?
• When will my papers be published?

This information will allow you to determine:

• The version of each paper to include in your eThesis file
• The access level option to select for your final thesis

Selecting an access level for your final thesis which reflects the strictest self-archiving policy of the publishers you’re working with will ensure that you’re not infringing any of your publishers’ self-archiving policies or breaking your copyright agreements.

Decision tree: Can I share my Journal format thesis Open Access? 

This interactive guide, accessed via Typeform , aims to help you understand the checks you need to make regarding the self-archiving policies of the publishers you’re working with, and to use this information to inform:

• The version of each article you include in your eThesis file
• The access level you select for your final eThesis

We recommend that you identify the strictest publisher policy that you need to deal with, and use this policy when completing this decision tree.

• Typeform - eThesis submission: journal format theses https://scholarlycomms1.typeform.com/to/bZAErZ

Journal format theses: downloadable guide

If you’d like more detailed information on considerations related to submission of your Journal format thesis, you can also download the eThesis submission: journal format thesis guide . This includes information on publisher self-archiving policies, and how these will inform the versions of papers you include in your thesis submission, and the access level you select for your final thesis.

• eThesis submission: journal format thesis guide 

You can also contact the eThesis Support Service  for more information and support.

• Library services
• Researcher services
• Prepare your eThesis
• Access to your final thesis
• Journal format theses
• Submitting your eThesis
• Sharing your thesis research data

• MyManchester
• Faculty StaffNet

• Biology, Medicine and Health Doctoral Academy

Journal format thesis submission

Submission of a thesis in journal format (formerly known as alternative format) may be appropriate for a PhD, MD or MPhil. It is an increasingly popular choice and provides students with experience of writing in journal paper formats.

If you think that your thesis would be appropriate for a journal format submission the first step is to discuss this with your supervisory team.  You no longer need approval from the Doctoral Academy to submit in this format. 

A thesis in journal format comprises sections that are in a format suitable for publication or dissemination. These can be published or submitted papers of chapters that are written as journal papers but not yet or even ever to be submitted. Apart from the inclusion of such materials, the journal format thesis must conform to the same standards expected for a standard thesis.

Any work submitted within the journal format thesis must be substantially different from any work which may have previously been submitted for any degree at this or any other institution.

One of the major considerations for submitting in journal format is the level of contribution that you have made to the journal papers to be included in the thesis (where published or submitted papers are used). It would be expected that you will have taken the major role in ALL aspects of production of the papers including: data acquisition, analysis and writing the paper.

As with standard doctoral/MPhil thesis, examiners should satisfy themselves that the journal format thesis meets the requirement of the doctoral degree as prescribed in the appropriate regulations and policies. The fact that a thesis contains material that has been published or accepted for publication does not guarantee that the examiner will recommend the award for which the candidate is being examined.

Approval for submission in journal format

In order to submit a thesis in journal format you should have the approval of your supervisory team. It is not necessary to request approval from the Doctoral Academy. You will be asked to indicate the format of your thesis during the examination process when completing your Notice of Submission Form.

Your supervisory team is best placed to advise on how to structure a thesis in journal format.

The work must constitute a body of publication tending towards a coherent and continuous thesis, rather than a series of disconnected publications. As such, any publications should be adapted and integrated within the structure of the thesis. Any sections of the thesis which are published or in publishable format should be clearly identified.

You should use the introductory section of the thesis to explain and justify in full the nature and extent of your contribution and the contribution of co-authors and the other collaborators to the publications presented. A significant proportion of the researched materials should be derived from original research undertaken after the date you initially registered with this University.

The number of papers included in the journal format thesis may vary according to discipline and is not prescribed, but should reflect the quantity, quality and originality of research and analysis expected of a candidate submitting a standard thesis.

The Faculty Exams Team will be able to identify PhD theses in journal format that are available in the library for your reference. Please contact [email protected]  if you require any further information.

Example structure

It is essential that the journal format thesis includes detailed and critical analysis of the work and methods used, since sections formatted for publication/dissemination may not already include this level of detail. The structure of the journal format thesis should include the following:

• rationale for submitting the thesis in an journal format and an account of how the thesis format has been constructed;
• context of the research¹ which should incorporate sections/chapters defining the rationale of the investigation and the strategy employed during the research as demonstrated in the thesis;
• review of previous research including sections summarising and synthesising previous research in the field of investigation;
• methodology detailing the methods employed during the research and a detailed critique analysis of those methods and the information they provide;
• presentation of results and their analysis in a format suitable for presentation in a peer-reviewed journal and/or in conventional thesis chapters as in the standard PhD thesis;
• summary/conclusion drawing together the various outcomes of the work into a coherent synthesis and indicating directions for future work;
• references and appendices should be included as in the standard PhD thesis.

Co-authored papers

Materials included in the journal format thesis may include those which are solely and/or partly authored by the student and may be already published, accepted for publication, or submitted for publication in externally refereed contexts such as journals and conference proceedings. You should use the introductory section of the thesis to explain and justify in full the nature and extent of the candidate's own contribution and the contribution of co-authors and other collaborators to the publications presented.

Formatting issues

Students should ensure that they have read the guidance on the presentation of a thesis which outlines how to include offprints of published material.

Students can also ask the Exams Team in the Doctoral Academy office for guidance on presentation and formatting issues. Please contact [email protected]  if you require further assistance.

The incorporation of publication-style chapters in the thesis will inevitably lead to some duplication since each publication-style chapter will have self-contained components that will overlap with parts of the other sections of the thesis. As a result, such a thesis might well be expected to be longer than a standard doctoral/MPhil thesis on the same topic.

The maximum length of the journal format doctoral thesis should not normally exceed 90,000 words of main text, including footnotes and endnotes.

The maximum length of the journal format MPhil thesis should not normally exceed 60,000 words, including footnotes and endnotes.

¹This is as expected for a standard thesis but it is essential that this format of thesis includes detailed and critical analysis of the previous work and methods used because the sections formatted for publication/dissemination may not cover these aspects in the depth expected of a PhD thesis.

Further information

• Journal Format Theses - Guiding Principles for Students and Staff (PDF, University login required).
• Essential information
• Thesis submission

Alternatively, use our A–Z index

Protected: ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

How we use your information

The University of Manchester Division of Development and Alumni Relations (DDAR) processes personal information in accordance with all relevant data protection legislation. Our Privacy Notice is available here ; and further information about data protection at the University is available here . Please tell us how you want to hear from DDAR by contacting us on [email protected] or +44 (0)161 306 3066; if you are a graduate you can also manage your personal information online at https://network.manchester.ac.uk/ .

• News & Events
• Get Involved

How to write a scientific report at university

David foster, professor in science and engineering at the university of manchester, explains the best way to write a successful scientific report.

David H Foster

At university, you might need to write scientific reports for laboratory experiments, computing and theoretical projects, and literature-based studies – and some eventually as research dissertations. All have a similar structure modelled on scientific journal articles. Their special format helps readers to navigate, understand and make comparisons across the research field.

Scientific report structure

The main components are similar for many subject areas, though some sections might be optional.

If you can choose a title, make it informative and not more than around 12 words. This is the average for scientific articles. Make every word count.  

The abstract summarises your report’s content in a restricted word limit. It might be read separately from your full report, so it should contain a micro-report, without references or personalisation.  

Usual elements you can include:  

• Some background to the research area.
• Reason for the work.
• Main results.
• Any implications.

Ensure you omit empty statements such as “results are discussed”, as they usually are.  

Introduction  

The introduction should give enough background for readers to assess your work without consulting previous publications.  

It can be organised along these lines:  

• An opening statement to set the context.  
• A summary of relevant published research.
• Your research question, hypothesis or other motivation.  
• The purpose of your work.
• An indication of methodology.
• Your outcome.

Choose citations to any previous research carefully. They should reflect priority and importance, not necessarily recency. Your choices signal your grasp of the field.  

Literature review  

Dissertations and literature-based studies demand a more comprehensive review of published research than is summarised in the introduction. Fortunately, you don’t need to examine thousands of articles. Just proceed systematically.  

• Use two to three published reviews to familiarise yourself with the field.  
• Use authoritative databases such as Scopus or Web of Science to find the most frequently cited articles.  
• Read these articles, noting key points. Experiment with their order and then turn them into sentences, in your own words.  
• Get advice about expected review length and database usage from your individual programme.

Aims and objectives  

Although the introduction describes the purpose of your work, dissertations might require something more accountable, with distinct aims and objectives.

The aim or aims represent the overall goal (for example, to land people on the moon). The objectives are the individual tasks that together achieve this goal (build rocket, recruit volunteers, launch rocket and so on).

The method section must give enough detail for a competent researcher to repeat your work. Technical descriptions should be accessible, so use generic names for equipment with proprietary names in parentheses (model, year, manufacturer, for example). Ensure that essential steps are clear, especially any affecting your conclusions.

The results section should contain mainly data and analysis. Start with a sentence or two to orient your reader. For numeric data, use graphs over tables and try to make graphs self-explanatory. Leave any interpretations for the discussion section.

The purpose of the discussion is to say what your results mean. Useful items to include:  

• A reminder of the reason for the work.
• A review of the results. Ensure you are not repeating the results themselves; this should be more about your thoughts on them.
• The relationship between your results and the original objective.
• Their relationship to the literature, with citations.  
• Any limitations of your results.  
• Any knowledge you gained, new questions or longer-term implications.

The last item might form a concluding paragraph or be placed in a separate conclusion section. If your report is an internal document, ensure you only refer to your future research plans.  

Try to finish with a “take-home” message complementing the opening of your introduction. For example: “This analysis has shown the process is feasible, but cost will decide its acceptability.”  

Five common mistakes to avoid when writing your doctoral dissertation   9 tips to improve your academic writing Five resources to help students with academic writing

Acknowledgements  

If appropriate, thank colleagues for advice, reading your report and technical support. Make sure that you secure their agreement first. Thank any funding agency. Avoid emotional declarations that you might later regret. That is all that is required in this section.  

Referencing  

Giving references ensures other authors’ ideas, procedures, results and inferences are credited. Use Web of Science or Scopus as mentioned earlier. Avoid databases giving online sources without journal publication details because they might be unreliable.

Don’t refer to Wikipedia. It isn’t a citable source.  

Use one referencing style consistently and make sure it matches the required style of your degree or department. Choose either numbers or author and year to refer to the full references listed near the end of your report. Include all publication details, not just website links. Every reference should be cited in the text.  

Figures and tables  

Each figure should have a caption below with a label, such as “Fig. 1”, with a title and a sentence or two about what it shows. Similarly for tables, except that the title appears above. Every figure and table should be cited in the text.

Theoretical studies  

More flexibility is possible with theoretical reports, but extra care is needed with logical development and mathematical presentation. An introduction and discussion are still needed, and possibly a literature review.

Final steps

Check that your report satisfies the formatting requirements of your department or degree programme. Check for grammatical errors, misspellings, informal language, punctuation, typos and repetition or omission.

Ask fellow students to read your report critically. Then rewrite it. Put it aside for a few days and read it afresh, making any new edits you’ve noticed. Keep up this process until you are happy with the final report. 

You may also like

.css-185owts{overflow:hidden;max-height:54px;text-indent:0px;} How to write an undergraduate university dissertation

Grace McCabe

How to use digital advisers to improve academic writing

How to write a successful research piece at university

Maggie Tighe

Register free and enjoy extra benefits

Main navigation

• Researchers
• Seminar Series

2024 Faculty of Science Excellence Award winners announced

• Tweet Widget

Michelle Maillet (Academic Associate), Lauren Kay (Clerical), Chantal Marotte (Management), and Moshe Dalva (Technical) have been named recipients of the Faculty of Science Excellence Awards.  

These awards, announced at the Faculty of Science Council meeting on May 21st, recognize the outstanding contributions made by members of the Faculty’s administrative and support staff during the 2023-2024 academic year.  

Read below the citations prepared by the Faculty of Science Excellence Awards Committee. 

Michelle Maillet, Department of Geography, Faculty of Science Excellence Award for Academic Associates  

As Undergraduate Advisor, Michelle Maillet has been responsible since 2014 for guiding students through their programs in the Department of Geography. Her job expanded in 2019 when she became full-time advisor for the Interfaculty program in Sustainability Science and Society. As a steadfast supporter of students’ interests, Michelle consistently goes the extra mile to provide students with outstanding support. One of many examples of this is her organization of extra mid-semester activities centered around arts and crafts that enable students to connect, socialize, and let off steam. She has a university-wide reputation as an exceptionally caring undergraduate advisor, to the point where many students name their interactions with her as their favourite part of being a Geography student.  For all these reasons and many more, I am very happy to present the Faculty of Science Excellence Award for Academic Associates to Michelle Maillet. 

Lauren Kay, Department of Physics, Faculty of Science Excellence Award for Clerical Staff  

Since 2010, Lauren Kay has served the Department of Physics with great distinction as the Graduate Program Coordinator. This is a huge responsibility, as Physics has about 200 graduate students, many of whom are international, with around 80 new entrants to be selected and around 80 who complete their programs each year. Lauren has made exceptional efforts to ensure that students progress through their thesis work smoothly, from streamlining procedures for paying them to constituting their thesis committees and coordinating their final defenses. She handles changing or exceptional circumstances, such as students having sudden visa problems, with considerable skill and good grace.   For all these reasons and many more, I am very happy to present the Faculty of Science Excellence Award for Clerical staff to Lauren Kay. 

Chantal Marotte, Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science Excellence Award for Management Staff   

Chantal Marotte has been with the Department of Chemistry for 38 years and has been managing the graduate program in Chemistry since 2003. She handles a range of activities, including filling TA positions, assessing graduate applications, and, perhaps most importantly, ensuring the well-being of graduate students with exceptional dedication and skill. At one point, she intervened extensively to find financial support for a student who experienced substantial loss because of a fire in their residence building. How much Chantal has touched the hearts of Chemistry students was made evident by a compilation of video testimonials that students and alumni made in 2021 to thank her for her efforts.  For all these reasons and many more, I am very happy to present the Faculty of Science Excellence Award for Management staff to Chantal Marotte. 

Moshe (Mike) Dalva, Department of Geography, Faculty of Science Excellence Award for Technical Staff   

Moshe (Mike) Dalva has been a Research Technician in the Department of Geography since 2004 and is also an MSc graduate from the same department. He couples exceptional understanding of the theory behind the intricate, complex, and sometimes old, pieces of equipment in Burnside Hall with remarkable technical skill in operating and fixing them. In one instance where an equipment failure appeared to be terminal, Mike was able to diagnose and begin fixing the problem within an hour, potentially saving the student who relied on this equipment many months of delay. He is deeply dedicated to ensuring that researchers conduct their work safely, not just in a laboratory setting but also in remote field locations, where he also provides essential support.   For all these reasons and many more, I am very happy to present the Faculty of Science Excellence Award for Technical staff to Moshe Dalva. 

• Faculty of Science

Department and University Information