Publication-based Doctorate Is Problematic as a Standard Procedure
Ziemann and Oestmann in their article point out an interesting new approach to gaining a doctoral degree. It aims at higher quality while “the motivation to embark on research” in students is taken for granted. However, for the overwhelming majority of students, their university education serves to provide them with the professional training needed to work in a practical, curative professional environment. This is based on a scientific understanding of evidence and information processing that needs to be taught during the undergraduate degree course, in addition to the facts. For this, and for efficiency review, a bachelor’s or master’s thesis may be sufficient.
A doctoral thesis that does justice to the demands and challenges of research should be reserved for colleagues aiming at making a career in that area. I therefore think it is problematic to make publication-based doctoral degrees the standard procedure. In addition the presented numbers of publications per doctoral candidate do not appear to present sufficient evidence of an improvement in quality. The authors themselves associate impact factors only to a limited extent with the publications . Some question marks therefore remain.
Dr. med. Klaus H. Seidenstücker
Conflict of interest statement
The author declares that no conflict of interest exists.
|1.||Ziemann E, Oestmann J-W: Publications by doctoral candidates at charité university hospital, Berlin, from 1998–2008. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2012; 109(18): 333–7. VOLLTEXT|