The Academic viva The format This viva lasts 30 minutes. You have 2 papers and get 1 hour to read them both. How to read a paper There are many ways and you should have your own format and a PRACTICED doing it in 30 minutes on some papers prior to the exam. One way:
Tips for the exam Some things crop up again and again. Here are some examples.
Worked example I got 2 papers form the BJS. Both within the last 6 months!I had read both prior to the exam. It is worthwhile therefore just flicking through the journal and if something comes up that most people will understand then there is a half a chance you may see it in he exam If you cannot understand the title let alone the paper because it was a study into some obscure genetic squibbly bobble that is found in the Indonesian water rat intestines that responds to grow faster hormone X75 from crushed toadstools….ignore it. Use your markers and highlight some lines and write down the points I have given above in the margin. So how does it go? Examiner: Starter for 10 …” tell me about paper 1….” You: You see an opening and off you go with the wind I your favour you recite it according to the set plan above. Examiner: This paper is from the BJS….. ”what is the impact factor of a journal” You: A gift of a question if you bothered to read about it.
Examiner: Then some questions on study design…
Then you get the harder questions. If you are not an academic you may be left out of your depth. If you have scored well and been confident to now you have passed already. These include stats questions You: Errrmmm. No idea. Ask a statistician? Examiner: “Do you think they had a good method of randomising their patients? Randomisation techniques” You: No. It was pretty obvious they had randomised by date of birth and not a recognised computer generated system. So know a little about this Examiner: “Tell me about Stratification” BUZZER… Thank god for that.
When did the second paper come in you may ask. I did too. Once you give a 60 second spiel and look confident on paper 1 they do not give you chance to do it again. So make it good. I think they just slipped it in when we talked about randomisation. Leading on from this we talked about methods and main findings in the second paper. If you are a transplant trainee you are laughing. Most examiners won’t have a clue on what the paper is about. The key is to dig out a few papers and discuss them with your colleagues. They will pick on a well written paper and one that just isn't quite up to the mark. After you read a few you will be able to spot these a mile away. Rememer you are not as good as you think you are, and talking over papers will give you confidence and you may also learn something while discussing something outside your field. I know nothing about stats. Glossed over it. Knew a few terms like; parameteric and non parametric tests, Mann Whiney U, Cox regression. |