Academic Viva Guidelines

ACADEMIC VIVA

Candidates should be aware that the examiners do not expect only a summary of the content of the paper during the viva.  Candidates should consider whether the study undertaken was of clinical relevance.  Publication of a manuscript in a reputable journal does not necessarily indicate that the study has been conducted properly or is of good quality.

In reviewing a paper, the candidate should consider what the authors were trying to demonstrate, whether the study was undertaken appropriately and whether the results justify the authors’ conclusions.  The candidate might wish to consider whether the study provided new information or attempted to clarify areas of doubt in the existing literature.  Specific points which could be considered are listed below:

Abstract

Does the abstract reflect accurately the content for the paper?

Introduction

Has the background to the study been given appropriately?

Is the aim of the study clearly stated?

What was the hypothesis?

Methodology

Was there selection bias by the authors?

What patients were excluded from the study?

Were the patients included in the study representative of patients encountered in general surgical practice?

Are the methods appropriate?

If a randomised study, was a power calculation used?

What information is required to undertake a power calculation?

Was the end point valid?

Was the difference sought in the study of clinical relevance?

Results

Are the results well set out?

Was statistical analysis appropriate or needed?

What is a type I or II error? (incorrect rejection or acceptance of the null hypothesis)

Have results been presented in a biased way?

Is follow-up adequate?

Are other significant potential complications excluded from analysis?

Discussion

Have the authors discussed their results fairly and made appropriate comparison with the existing published literature?

What are the novel observations?

Are you aware whether the topic is covered in existing guidelines or published papers?

Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?

What are the healthcare issues?