Next Article in Journal
Magazine Publishing Innovation: Two Case Studies on Managing Creativity
Previous Article in Journal
A Vision for Open Cyber-Scholarly Infrastructures
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Publications 2016, 4(2), 14; doi:10.3390/publications4020014

Knowledge Production in Two Types of Medical PhD Routes—What’s to Gain?

Department of Medical Informatics and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, “Iuliu Haţieganu” University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca 400012, Romania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Alan Singleton
Received: 4 February 2016 / Accepted: 6 June 2016 / Published: 8 June 2016
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [822 KB, uploaded 8 June 2016]   |  

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the assumption that differences exist between the traditional and publication-based PhD routes in terms of the thesis’ length and the scientific publications originating from it. Method: A retrospective comparative study on medical PhD theses offered by an online repository was performed. All free full-text medical PhD theses defended at United Kingdom institutions between 2003 and 2015 were analyzed and assigned to the traditional (TT) or publication based thesis (PBT) group. Several characteristics of theses and thesis-related articles were collected and analyzed. The thesis-related articles were investigated regarding quantity and visibility (citations, impact factor, and journal rank). Results: The theses length proved similar in PBT and TT group. PBT group included significantly more studies than TT group (mean 4.44 vs. 2.67) also reflected in significantly more thesis-related articles. The percentage of articles listed in Web of Science and published in a journal with impact factor proved significantly lower in TT compared with PBT group. On the contrary, article citations were significantly higher for TT. Both groups published similarly in high-ranked journals (Q1 or Q2). Conclusion: The research productivity originating from the PBT group was, as expected, significantly larger but not significantly more visible than those from TT group. View Full-Text
Keywords: knowledge production; doctoral productivity; publication-based PhD; traditional PhD; thesis; medicine knowledge production; doctoral productivity; publication-based PhD; traditional PhD; thesis; medicine
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Urda-Cîmpean, A.E.; Bolboacă, S.D.; Achimaş-Cadariu, A.; Drugan, T.C. Knowledge Production in Two Types of Medical PhD Routes—What’s to Gain? Publications 2016, 4, 14.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Publications EISSN 2304-6775 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top