Dissertation Topic Selection Priorities Among Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research Students and Alumni

Dissertation topic selection is a central decision in doctoral training, yet little empirical evidence describes how trainees in Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research (POR) approach this choice. This study describes how POR students and alumni prioritize dissertation topic selection criteria and how these perceptions evolve over time.

We conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey of current and former POR doctoral trainees in the United States. Participants completed a ranking task and a point-allocation prioritization exercise to assess the relative importance of predefined selection criteria. Open-text responses were analyzed thematically to capture differences in perspectives across stages of training.

Thirty-eight respondents completed the ranking task and 32 completed the prioritization exercise. Personal interest, real-world impact, and policy relevance were each selected among the top five criteria by 76.3% of respondents and received the highest relative weights (0.178, 0.179, and 0.163, respectively). Career alignment, originality, and flexibility received moderate relative weights (0.116, 0.104, and 0.086, respectively). Funding availability received lower relative weight on average (0.036), whereas faculty expertise received a moderate relative weight (0.093). Qualitative responses indicated that feasibility constraints, such as data access, mentorship alignment, and funding pathways, often became more salient with experience and reshaped early topic preferences.

POR trainees and alumni in this exploratory sample described dissertation topic selection as an evolving process shaped by both personal motivation and practical constraints. The findings highlight how trainees weigh common trade-offs when choosing a topic and may support clearer discussions between trainees and mentors.