A clear compass: studying for your PhD with open science, dialogue and impact
&width=710&height=710 "Dual portrait of two researchers")
Our researchers include more than 1,700 PhD students who work on impactful research every day. They are supported by a PhD team with a supervisor. Their PhD programme demonstrates that they have the skills to be scientists. It is important that the results reach the target group for whom they are intended, such as fellow researchers, patients and other people in society. In this way, PhD students make an impact in science and society with their research.
Undesirable variation
Because a lot is asked of PhD candidates, clarity in expectations is important. Unfortunately, in practice it turned out that undesirable variation in expectations arose. Kiki Kuijpers, chair of the LUMC Association for PhD Candidates (LAP): “Each department had different ideas about what was expected of you in order to obtain a PhD. This led to a great deal of uncertainty and sometimes even delays in PhD programmes.” For example, there were different stories about whether all chapters had to be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, the position of the PhD candidate in the list of authors, and how many chapters were expected (minimum and maximum) in a thesis.
Clearer expectations
Bob Siegerink is head of the Graduate School, which supports supervisors and PhD candidates in the PhD process: ‘The expectations needed to be clarified for all parties. The way science is conducted has also changed over the years. That is why we launched the PhD Thesis Framework, to provide greater clarity about what a thesis should contain and what the guidelines are for a “typical thesis”. We had many discussions with various stakeholders: supervisors, PhD candidates, colleagues from other faculties, other university medical centres and even international scientists. We incorporated the input from these discussions into the framework. Ultimately, the supervisor remains responsible for the initial assessment, after which the doctoral committee and opposition give their opinion. However, the framework will form the basis for a discussion between the supervisor and the PhD candidate, thereby removing uncertainty and ambiguity.”
Quality over quantity
The framework pays greater attention to the principles of Leiden University's Academia in Motion programme. This programme combines developments in the areas of “Recognition and Rewards” and “Open Science” in the ambition for a cultural change towards an “open knowledge community” that is closely connected to society and that recognises and appreciates everyone's contribution to the university's strategic goals.
Marieke Adriaanse is the Recognise and Rewards ambassador within this programme and contributed to the framework: "A PhD programme is a test of competence. The end result is the thesis, and in it we want to see that someone can deliver a certain level of scientific quality. Previously, we sometimes used the publication status of the articles in this thesis as a measure of quality. We looked at how many articles had been published and at the so-called “journal impact factor” (JIF) of the journals in which they had been published. The JIF reflects how often articles are cited on average in a scientific journal, but it is not a suitable measure of the quality of individual articles within that journal. Moreover, high-quality research takes many forms, which do not always fit within this type of journal, and focusing on publication numbers has all kinds of unpleasant side effects, such as “salami slicing”. This refers to breaking down a single study into as many publications as possible, which only benefits quantity and certainly not quality. That is why we have prioritised quality over quantity and use a broader definition of quality.”
Preprints and collaboration
“In line with developments in the field of Open Science, we are also focusing much more on collaboration and preprints. In addition, we are making first-author publications in international scientific journals much less of a requirement for a thesis,” Adriaanse continues. “As a scientist, you must of course be able to process comments from fellow scientists (peer review). That is why it is a requirement to have one peer-reviewed international publication. But beyond that, it is mainly about sharing your work with others. A preprint is also ideal for this. It also prevents delays for the PhD candidate, because the publication process often takes a very long time. It is up to the assessor, the supervisor, to find the right balance in this together with the PhD candidate."
Collaboration is another important theme in the framework. Adriaanse: "There is sometimes a perception that scientists spend all day on their own, coming up with brilliant ideas. But science is teamwork. The framework allows space to include those team contributions in the thesis. There is also space to indicate what else makes you a competent scientist. Some PhD students, for example, teach, are members of a board or have co-authored a grant application. This shows the development of PhD students as scientists in a broader sense. That is important for every scientist, from fundamental to clinical researchers.”
Positive reactions
The PhD Thesis Framework will officially come into use on 1 October 2025. Kuijpers: “The initial responses to the framework have been very positive. At the same time, there are questions about what exactly the framework means for PhD students who are in the middle of their PhD (research). PhD students who are nearing the end of their programme in particular wondered whether they would need to provide additional information due to the new guidelines.”
Siegerink: “That is not the case, of course. We are not going to make the rules much stricter while you are in the middle of your programme. The framework provides an overview of what we all believe a competent scientist should be able to do. The regulations were already in place, but the framework provides more clarity on how we interpret them collectively. When we explain that the framework offers scope to include other activities in the thesis that demonstrate their competence as a scientist and to highlight collaboration more, they are pleased with these new opportunities.”
“Of course, we will evaluate this with a PhD student who is conducting research on this topic. The coolest thing would be to receive theses that demonstrate excellent learning pathways and, even more so, the impact on society and science.”, tells Siegerink.
‘For PhD students who are just starting out, it's great that they can use the framework to start the conversation right away,’ says Kuijpers. ‘I'm very curious to see how they will look back on their journey in four years' time.’
Research at the LUMC
Science provides answers to a wide range of questions that ultimately improve people's health and healthcare. At the LUMC, we do this in many different ways. For example, we try to learn more about how a disease works and look at innovative treatments and medicines. We also address questions about prevention, develop tools for healthcare providers and examine medical-ethical issues. Cooperation, innovation and knowledge sharing are the guiding principles in this regard.
Academia in Motion is part of Future@Work, our strategic movement towards a future-proof organisation.
