Writing a Medical Specialty Thesis: A Systematic Review of Methodological Quality and Academic Writing Factors

Abstract

Objective: Medical specialty theses represent an essential component of postgraduate medical education and contribute to the development of scientific thinking, research design, and academic writing skills among young researchers. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the process of writing a medical specialty thesis and the factors influencing academic writing quality based on the available literature. Methods: The study was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A literature search was performed in the PubMed database using the keyword “how to write a medical thesis.” The initial search identified 175 studies. After screening titles and abstracts, 30 studies were selected for full-text evaluation. Following full-text assessment, 6 studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded, and 24 studies were included in the systematic review. Results: Most of the included studies consisted of bibliometric analyses and cross-sectional investigations. The findings indicated that a considerable proportion of theses exhibited deficiencies in methodological reporting and academic writing standards. Some studies reported that only 12.2% of theses demonstrated high scientific writing quality, while approximately 47% met standard academic writing criteria. In addition, the proportion of theses converted into peer-reviewed publications was limited, ranging between 20% and 32% across different fields. Time constraints, lack of methodological knowledge, and limited access to research resources were reported as major barriers during the research and writing process. Conversely, training programs in academic writing and research methodology were shown to significantly improve thesis writing skills. Conclusion: These findings suggest that strengthening research methodology education, improving thesis supervision processes, and encouraging the publication of thesis findings may enhance the scientific quality and academic contribution of medical specialty theses.

Keywords

• medical thesis
• academic writing
• research methodology
• systematic review
• medical education

Supporting Institution

This study did not receive any financial support from public, commercial, or non-profit funding agencies.

Ethical Statement

No experiments involving human participants or animals were conducted in this study. The study was prepared in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical committee approval was not required due to the retrospective nature of the data. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Thanks

The authors would like to thank all colleagues and the clinical staff who contributed to the preparation of this study.

Tıpta Uzmanlık Tezi Yazım Süreci: Akademik Yazım ve Metodolojik Kalite Üzerine Sistematik Bir Derleme

Abstract

Amaç: Tıpta uzmanlık tezleri, uzmanlık eğitiminin önemli bir akademik bileşeni olup genç araştırmacıların bilimsel düşünme, araştırma tasarlama ve akademik yazım becerilerinin gelişmesine katkı sağlamaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, tıpta uzmanlık tezi yazım sürecini ve akademik yazım kalitesini etkileyen faktörleri literatür eşliğinde sistematik olarak değerlendirmektir. Yöntem: Çalışma PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) rehberine uygun olarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Literatür taraması PubMed veri tabanında “how to write a medical thesis” anahtar ifadesi kullanılarak yapılmıştır. İlk tarama sonucunda 175 çalışma belirlenmiş, başlık ve özet incelemesi sonrasında 30 çalışma tam metin değerlendirmesine alınmıştır. Tam metin incelemesi sonucunda kriterleri karşılamayan 6 çalışma dışlanmış ve 24 çalışma sistematik derlemeye dahil edilmiştir. Bulgular: Dahil edilen çalışmaların önemli bir bölümü bibliyometrik analizler ve kesitsel araştırmalardan oluşmaktadır. Bulgular tezlerin önemli bir kısmında metodolojik raporlama ve akademik yazım standartları açısından eksiklikler bulunduğunu göstermektedir. Bazı çalışmalarda tezlerin yalnızca %12.2’sinin yüksek bilimsel yazım kalitesine sahip olduğu, yaklaşık %47’sinin akademik yazım standartlarını karşıladığı bildirilmiştir. Ayrıca tez çalışmalarının bilimsel makaleye dönüştürülme oranlarının sınırlı olduğu ve farklı alanlarda %20–32 arasında değiştiği gösterilmiştir. Araştırma sürecinde zaman kısıtı, metodolojik bilgi eksikliği ve araştırma kaynaklarına erişim sorunları önemli engeller olarak bildirilmiştir. Buna karşın akademik yazım ve araştırma metodolojisi eğitimlerinin tez yazım becerilerini geliştirdiği gösterilmiştir. Sonuç: Bu bulgular tıpta uzmanlık tezlerinin kalitesini artırmak için araştırma metodolojisi ve akademik yazım eğitimlerinin güçlendirilmesi, tez danışmanlığı süreçlerinin geliştirilmesi ve tez çalışmalarının bilimsel makaleye dönüştürülmesinin teşvik edilmesi gerektiğini göstermektedir.

Keywords

• Tıpta uzmanlık tezi
• akademik yazım
• araştırma metodolojisi
• sistematik derleme
• tıp eğitimi

Supporting Institution

Bu çalışma herhangi bir kamu, ticari veya kâr amacı gütmeyen kuruluştan finansal destek almamıştır.

Ethical Statement

Bu çalışmada insan katılımcılar ve/veya deney hayvanları üzerinde herhangi bir müdahale yapılmamıştır. Çalışma, Helsinki Bildirgesi ilkelerine uygun olarak hazırlanmıştır. Retrospektif veri kullanımı nedeniyle etik kurul onayı gerekmemektedir. Yazarlar, çıkar çatışması bulunmadığını beyan eder.

Thanks

Yazarlar, çalışmanın hazırlanma sürecinde katkı sunan tüm meslektaşlarına ve klinik ekibe teşekkür eder.

References

1. 1. Ahmad HR. How to write a Doctoral Thesis. Pak J Med Sci. 2016 Mar-Apr;32(2):270-3. doi: 10.12669/pjms.322.10181. PMID: 27182221; PMCID: PMC4859004.
2. 2. Duke T. How to do a postgraduate research project and write a minor thesis. Arch Dis Child. 2018 Sep;103(9):820-827. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2018-315340. Epub 2018 May 26. PMID: 29804055.
3. 3. Thiero O, Tounkara M, Konare F, Keita S, Diarra S. Scientific writing quality of theses in Medicine and Pharmacy at the University of Bamako (Mali). Tunis Med. 2024 Mar 5;102(3):134-138. French. doi: 10.62438/tunismed.v102i3.4661. PMID: 38545707; PMCID: PMC11358769.
4. 4. Yahia F, Gazzeh H, Ben Mansour F, Zanina Y, Neffati E, Ben Abdelaziz A. From Thesis to Publication: Unveiling the Predictive Factors for Cardiology Research at a North African Faculty of Medicine (Tunisia). Tunis Med. 2024 Nov 5;102(11):858-865. English. doi: 10.62438/tunismed.v102i11.5230. PMID: 39564627; PMCID: PMC11668158.
5. 5. Ratnani I, Fatima S, Fatima E, Hill I, Surani Z. Essentials of Writing a Successful Doctoral Thesis. Cureus. 2025 Aug 8;17(8):e89626. doi: 10.7759/cureus.89626. PMID: 40922868; PMCID: PMC12414501.
6. 6. Bahadoran Z, Mirmiran P, Kashfi K, Ghasemi A. The Principles of Biomedical Scientific Writing: Abstract and Keywords. Int J Endocrinol Metab. 2020 Jan 28;18(1):e100159. doi: 10.5812/ijem.100159. PMID: 32308700; PMCID: PMC7144240.
7. 7. Gibbons S. The 6Ps of Preparing a Manuscript: Prior Preparation Prevents Potentially Poor Performance. J Nat Prod. 2024 Aug 23;87(8):2132-2138. doi: 10.1021/acs.jnatprod.4c00562. Epub 2024 Jul 23. PMID: 39041724.
8. 8. Bothra M, Nair BT, Nair S. Impact of a Focused Thesis Writing Workshop on Knowledge and Confidence of Medical Postgraduate Students: A Cross-sectional Study. J Assoc Physicians India. 2025 Oct;73(10):20-23. doi: 10.59556/japi.73.1189. PMID: 41100313.

9. 9. Ben Abdelaziz A, Errafei A, Nouira S, Ben Abdelaziz A, Chebil D, Azzaza M. Editorial quality of the doctoral thesis at the Faculty of Medicine of Sousse (Tunisia). Tunis Med. 2022 mai;100(5):396-402. English. PMID: 36206089; PMCID: PMC9552243.
10. 10. Helgesson G, Juth N, Schneider J, Lövtrup M, Lynøe N. Misuse of Coauthorship in Medical Theses in Sweden. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2018 Oct;13(4):402-411. doi: 10.1177/1556264618784206. Epub 2018 Jul 9. PMID: 29985088.
11. 11. Giesler M, Boeker M, Fabry G, Biller S. Importance and benefits of the doctoral thesis for medical graduates. GMS J Med Educ. 2016 Feb 15;33(1):Doc8. doi: 10.3205/zma001007. PMID: 26958656; PMCID: PMC4766933.
12. 12. Hart J, Hakim J, Kaur R, Jeremy R, Coorey G, Kalman E, Jenkin R, Bowen D. Research supervisors' views of barriers and enablers for research projects undertaken by medical students; a mixed methods evaluation of a post-graduate medical degree research project program. BMC Med Educ. 2022 May 13;22(1):370. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03429-0. PMID: 35562832; PMCID: PMC9107151.
13. 13. Resta RG, McCarthy Veach P, Charles S, Vogel K, Blase T, Palmer CG. Publishing a master's thesis: a guide for novice authors. J Genet Couns. 2010 Jun;19(3):217-27. doi: 10.1007/s10897-009-9276-2. Epub 2010 Jan 14. PMID: 20076994; PMCID: PMC2874663.
14. 14. Izawa S, Sugaya N, Ogawa N, Nagano Y, Nakano M, Nakase E, Shirotsuki K, Yamada KC, Machida K, Kodama M, Nomura S. Episodic stress associated with writing a graduation thesis and free cortisol secretion after awakening. Int J Psychophysiol. 2007 May;64(2):141-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2007.01.004. Epub 2007 Jan 23. PMID: 17316855.
15. 15. Shah JN. Guide, Co-guide, Supervisors as Author in Publication on Student Thesis. J Nepal Health Res Counc. 2021 Sep 6;19(2):434-436. doi: 10.33314/jnhrc.v19i2.3670. PMID: 34601547.
16. 16. Azouaou M, Medkour I, Tliba S, Ben Abdelaziz A. Evaluation of a certifying training experience in research methodology and scientific writing at the Faculty of Medicine of Bejaia (Algeria). Tunis Med. 2020 Feb;98(2):99-109. PMID: 32395798.
17. 17. Tollan A, Magnus JH. Writing a scientific paper as part of the medical curriculum. Med Educ. 1993 Sep;27(5):461-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.1993.tb00301.x. PMID: 8208151.
18. 18. Mrabet A, Chadli Debbiche A, Abidi E, Borsali Falfoul N, Dziri C. Critical study of pathology theses supported at the medical university of Tunis (2000-2010). Tunis Med. 2016 Feb;94(2):167-71. PMID: 27532542.
19. 19. Ferhatoğlu MF, Kıvılcım T, Kartal A, Filiz Aİ, Kebudi A. An analysis of general surgery theses set up between years 1998-2018 in Turkey: Evidence levels and publication rates of 1996 theses. Turk J Surg. 2020 Mar 18;36(1):9-14. doi: 10.5578/turkjsurg.4405. PMID: 32637870; PMCID: PMC7315456.
20. 20. Bazrafkan L, Shokrpour N, Yousefi A, Yamani N. Management of Stress and Anxiety Among PhD Students During Thesis Writing: A Qualitative Study. Health Care Manag (Frederick). 2016 Jul-Sep;35(3):231-40. doi: 10.1097/HCM.0000000000000120. PMID: 27455365.
21. 21. Onguka S, de Meijer F, Basnight-Brown DM. Overdue Assignment: A Case Study on Academic Writing Development for Postgraduate Health Professional Trainees in Kenya. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2023 Oct 16;10:23821205231206220. doi: 10.1177/23821205231206220. PMID: 38025028; PMCID: PMC10656809.
22. 22. Shankar M, Udayashankar A, Rajanna S, Anandh U, Chaudhury AR. Barriers and Constraints in Scientific Manuscript Preparation Among Nephrologists: Insights From India. Int J Nephrol. 2025 Feb 23;2025:9008616. doi: 10.1155/ijne/9008616. PMID: 40034191; PMCID: PMC11872293.
23. 23. Liebano RE, Dias SL, Ferreira LM. Number of objectives and conclusions in dissertations and thesis. Acta Cir Bras. 2005 Jul-Aug;20(4):272-4. doi: 10.1590/s0102-86502005000400002. Epub 2005 Jul 18. PMID: 16186944.
24. 24. Boly A, Tachfouti N, Zohoungbogbo IS, Achhab YE, Nejjari C. Évaluation de la qualité méthodologique des thèses soutenues à la Faculté de Médecine de Fès [Assessment of the methodological quality of theses submitted to the Faculty of Medicine Fez]. East Mediterr Health J. 2014 Jun 9;20(5):340-6. French. PMID: 24952292.