Content analysis of the South African MMed mini-dissertation

Background. There is no baseline information on the South African (SA) MMed mini-dissertation, which became a compulsory (and controversial) research component for specialist registration in 2011.Objective. To obtain evidence-based information regarding the current composition of the research output of the MMed mini-dissertation.Methods. SA MMed mini-dissertations (N=307) were downloaded from electronic theses and dissertation websites and 8 university repositories that provide specialist training. Fourteen variables were noted for each mini-dissertation, the data were entered into an Excel (2016) (Microsoft, USA) spreadsheet and analysed using descriptive statistics.Results. The 307 mini-dissertations, representing 24 of the Colleges of Medicine of SA, were submitted from 1996 to 2018, mainly in monograph format (76%) and almost equally divided between prospective and retrospective studies. Observational studies predominated, with meta-analyses, systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials comprising 5% of the sample. Although quantitative investigations dominated (82%), just less than half of these used statistics to test variables. Confirmed ethical compliance improved from 41% in pre-2011 dissertations to 83% for dissertations submitted during 2015 - 2018.Conclusions. This study provides descriptive data on the SA MMed mini-dissertation. Comparisons indicate that the MMed research component compares favourably with the content and research approach of similar international specialist trainee research outputs

Things may not be as Expected: Surprising Findings when Updating Work Load at the Wits Human Research Ethics Committee (Medical)

Objectives. To compare numbers of applications to the University of the Witwatersrand Human Research Ethics Committee (Medical) for clearance by the full committee during 2011 - 2013; to see the proportion of clinical Master's applications in 2013 and to look for the influence of eight variables in applications reviewed from January to June 2013.Methods. A retrospective extraction of data from committee minutes (2011-2013) and application forms (January - June 2013) was done. Statistical analysis was completed using SAS for Windows (version 9.4). Variables examined were committee decision; choice of research method; supervision or not; supervisors' research degree; supervisors' publication group; university administrative entity; registered degree and month of approval after first review.Results. Total numbers were 685 (2011); 845 (2012; a 23.4% increase from 2011) and 769 (2013; a 9.0% decrease on the previous year). In 2013; 22% of applications were for clinical Master's degrees required by the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) for specialist registration. A number of cross-tabulations of variables are presented. Logistic regression analysis (Proc Catmod) showed that three variables significantly influenced the committee's initial review decision; namely school (p=0.03); applicants' registered degree (p=0.01) and the research method chosen (p=0.03). The month of committee approval was also significantly affected by school (p=0.002). Preferred research methodologies for supervised and independent research applications differed within and between schools.Conclusion. A predicted continuous increase in number of applications from 2011 to 2013 did not happen for unknown reasons. Research method; school; and registered degree significantly influenced the committee's decision at the initial review of applications. For clinical Masters; and other Masters; a supervisor's degree had no effect on the committee's decision at the initial review of applications; however undergraduate and honours applicants having supervisors without a research degree had more than double the approval rate at first review than when supervisors had either a Doctorate or a Master's (p=0.008). Supervisors' possession of a research degree did not increase approval rate of applications nor did a supervisor's publication grouping