Sei sulla pagina 1di 42

3rd year 2016-17

Applied PEP (APEP)

Guidelines: for Supervisors and
Year 3 MB ChB Students
Table of Contents
SECTION 1 .................................................................................................................................................. 2
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 2
Specific Aims and Objectives of APEP 2
SECTION 2 ................................................................................................................................................. 3
Key Facts for Success with APEP ................................................................................................................ 3
Dates and reminders 5
SECT I ON 3 ................................................................................................................................................ 6
Range of APEP Projects .............................................................................................................. 6
Types of APEP 6
Non-Research APEP 6
Research APEPs 8
Ethical Approval for Research Projects 8
Posting Volunteer Opportunities on 1Med Buzz 9
SECTION 4 ................................................................................................................................................ 10
Project Selection and Registration ........................................................................................... 10
Selection and Registration 10
Changing Supervisor 11
District General Hospitals (DGH) 11
SECTION 5 .............................................................................................................................................. 12
Presenting APEP at Conferences .............................................................................................. 12
SECTION 6 .............................................................................................................................................. 13
Project Work and Supervision .................................................................................................. 13
Supervision Before the APEP Period 13
Project Summary eForm for APEP 13
Supervision During the APEP Period 13
APEP Supervisor Workshops 14
APEP Oral Exam Mandatory Training 14
SECTION 7 ...............................................................................................................................................15
Statistics, Design and Evaluation ..............................................................................................15
Statistical Support 15
Statistical Information Resources 18
SECTION 8 .............................................................................................................................................. 19
Assessments and Feedback ...................................................................................................... 19
Formative Assessed Elements 19
Performance and Engagement 19
Summative Assessment of the Written Report 20
Deadline for submitting the written report online 21
Written Report - Definition for Grades Awarded 21
Summative Assessment of Oral Presentation 27
Oral Presentation Assessment Criteria 27
Feedback from Supervisors to Students during APEP 28
Final Grading Decisions 28
SECTION 9 .............................................................................................................................................. 30
Academic Malpractice, Appeals and Mitigation ....................................................................... 30
SECTION 10 ............................................................................................................................................ 31
Patient Data and Confidentiality .............................................................................................. 31
Information security 31
Clinical images 31
SECTION 11 ............................................................................................................................................. 32
Useful References and Resources ............................................................................................. 32
SECTION 12............................................................................................................................................. 33
Appendix: Handy Tools for Students and Supervisors ............................................................ 33
Project summary eForm questions 33
Written report declaration 40
Assessing oral presentations 40

The Applied Personal Excellent Pathway (APEP) is a 10 week student selected component in the
MB ChB Programme during Year 3 and runs between March and June. During the first 9 weeks of
this period students work on their chosen project, with the final week for presentations and
assessments. Students have a choice of undertaking one of the following:

1. a research project
2. a non-research project

Specific Aims and Objectives of APEP

All APEP project students should:

define the objectives of their chosen project

study a particular problem, specialty or aspect of medicine in depth
plan how to make best use of the time allocated
be able to critically review literature
understand research methodology
understand basic statistical analysis of numerical data
be able to communicate clearly in writing
be able to communicate key findings in a 5 minute oral presentation


Key Facts for Success with APEP

The following pages provide condensed guidance for both students and supervisors collaborating
in an APEP, however they are not a suitable substitute for reading the entire

The responsibilities of the student are to:

read the APEP guidelines in full
submit the completed registration form before the deadline
fulfill the specific aims and objectives of the APEP
attend, undertake and complete the project before the specified deadlines
provide a draft of the written report to the supervisor before the submission deadline
submit the written report by the specified deadline
present results on the specified oral presentation date
go prepared to a weekly supervision meeting and take notes of the meeting
communicate clearly with your supervisor about any difficulties
seek help early if difficulties arise and report any difficulties with your supervisor to your
Base Hospital Coordinator and the MB ChB APEP administrator immediately

The following are not acceptable for APEP students:

a project outside the Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health and its affiliated Teaching
taking a planned absence during the APEP period
opting out of the APEP because student did research or a project at another time
failure to complete registration via MedLea before the deadline
submitting written work done previously (e.g. as part of an intercalated or prior degree)
late submission of report
failure to attend oral presentation

The responsibilities of APEP supervisors are to:

make a clear agreement with the student about what is expected in terms of attendance
schedule and honour a weekly supervision meeting to monitor progress, answer questions and
ensure resources are available
hold a half-way meeting with the student to assess progress towards the learning objectives
at the mid-point of the APEP
meet with the student during the last week of the APEP period to provide feedback on the
written report
be available throughout the APEP period. Absences may be acceptable provided that someone
who can genuinely deputise is available for the student, and the student is aware of this
be approachable and accessible
communicate important information to students

help students put together and give an oral presentation, allow the student to rehearse the
presentation and, if at all possible, be present at the presentation
read students work thoroughly and in advance of meetings and be constructively critical
act as an advisor to the student by ensuring clear and realistic goals
be clear of the standards required of students and of how APEP projects are assessed
be clear on how APEP oral presentations are assessed
teach new skills that the student may not yet have acquired which may include specific clinical
skills, experimental technique, accessing information, literature searches, exploiting new
information, statistical techniques, data analysis, synthesis and interpretation, qualitative
analysis, managing complex and lengthy tasks, drafting and writing in appropriate style,
preparing an oral presentation
complete the supervisor assessment form on MedLea before the deadline: Friday 23 June

For research projects requiring ethics approval the supervisor is responsible and must obtain
the following, before the APEP period starts:

Ethical approval reference

R&D approval
These tasks must NEVER be delegated to the student.

Decision tools are available to assist with ethical approval in research projects:

The following is not acceptable for supervisors:

failure to obtain and provide the ethical approval reference and R&D approval for
research projects where applicable
being away during the first 2 weeks at the beginning and/or the 2 weeks at the end
(both critical times) of the APEP period
delegating the majority of APEP supervision to someone ineligible, e.g. Specialist
Registrar, PhD student, Nurse or Lab Technician
using a student to do ones research or audit
using a student to trawl through large numbers of hospital medical records
accepting an inappropriately large number of students (see Existing Supervisors)
supervising two or more students who are participating in, or collaborating on, the
same project (see Plagiarism and Assessment of the Written Report)
repeating a project from the previous year

Dates and reminders

Subject Day Date Time Details

Centrally delivered briefing session for Day
Wednesday Date
7 September 2016 Time
5.00pm Venue 3
Stopford Building, Lecture Theatre
students Session 1
MedLea offerings page live to students Friday 24 October 2016
Deadline for registering your APEP Friday 25 November 2017 Student registers online via MedLea
Deadline for registering a New Supervisor Friday 20 January 2017 NB. ONLY NEW SUPERVISORS
Deadline for obtaining ethical approval for Friday 20 January 2017
research projects
APEP period Mon - Fri 27 March 9 June 2017

Centrally delivered briefing session for Wednesday 1 March 2017 5.00pm Stopford Building, Lecture Theatre 3
students Session 2
Mandatory APEP Sector Briefing Session for Mon- Fri Early March 2017 TBC on MedLea Students should inform their Tutor if absence is required to
Students Timetable attend. Lecture Venue at the Sector Site*
Deadline for supervisors and students to Mon - Tue 27 28 March 2017
Statistics introductory lecture (see SECTION 29 March 2017 2pm Stopford Buildng, Lecture Theatre 1
Deadline for students to submit their written Friday 9 June 2017 12:00 midday Online via MedLea
Supervisor to meet with the student to Mon -Fri 12 - 16 June 2017
provide feedback on the written report

APEP presentation dates Wed - Fri 14 - 16 June 2017 Various venues. (Keep all these dates free in your
diary). Timetable will be generated in Feb/Mar.
Deadline for supervisors to complete an Friday 23 June 2017 Supervisor to mark online via MedLea
assessment and feedback for their student(s)
Re-sit APEP Presentations Wed 12 July 2017 (TBC) 2pm Stopford Building

* Students must attend the MANDATORY APEP Sector Briefing

Session at the sector venue where their project is registered.


Range of APEP Projects

Types of APEP
Students can choose from the following:
1. Non-research APEP
2. Research APEP

Use the link below to determine if your APEP is classed as a research or non-research project

The aims and objectives for all projects include:

students acquiring the ability to critically review literature
understanding research methodology
understanding basics of statistical analysis of numerical data

Non-Research APEP

Students should gain exposure to a topic, acquire new knowledge and skills and undertake:
a service evaluation
a clinical audit
a systematic review
a critical appraisal for answers to real-life clinical questions based on the best available

The topic may be any clinical specialty, laboratory or basic sciences, health care management,
health informatics, clinical risk and safety, ethics or medico legal. Thus students who choose to
do non-research projects will not gain direct hands-on experience of research but will need to
achieve all the objectives from teaching sessions in statistics and statistical computing,
independent study and discussions with supervisors.

Service Evaluation as a Non-Research Project

Service evaluation projects are designed and conducted solely to define or judge current care,
asking the question "What standard does this service achieve?". Service evaluation usually
involves analysis of existing data, and may include administration of interview or questionnaire.
There is no randomisation and it does not require NHS REC review. A service evaluation
measures current services without referring to a standard, or with any intervention. Choice of
treatment happens before a service evaluation.

Clinical Audit as a Non-Research Project

Audits are popular non-research projects, these assess whether best practice is actually being
delivered to patients, they focus on the process and outcome, not on the individual.

An audit helps to:

ensure patients receive the best possible care
identify areas of deficiency/overlap in practice
identify areas of good practice
set standards where none exist
improve efficiency and effectiveness of service
improve patient satisfaction
support bids for resources
inform need for organisational change

Practical Aspects about a Clinical Audit

Staff in the Clinical Audit Department at each base hospital? can advise about possible
projects, which may include audit projects that need to be initiated or undertaken to
complete the audit cycle
While the process of audit follows a simple cycle and entails closing the loop with re-audit, a
student may only be able to undertake part of this cycle owing to the time constraints of the
APEP period. Thus alternative arrangements will have to be made by the supervisor for
completing the audit cycle
The Clinical Audit department must be contacted well in advance of the APEP period if
assistance is required with tasks such as identifying a particular group of patients, retrieval of
medical notes, designing a pro-forma and creating a database
If medical notes have to be perused for data, they must not be taken away by the student
Anonymity and confidentiality must be maintained during data collection (see SECTION 10).

Clinical Audit vs Service Evaluation

Use the tool below to identify if your project conforms to the requirements of Clinical Audit:

Both research and clinical audit may involve measuring patient outcomes but they are not the
same. Research creates new knowledge that helps define what best practice is. If you are
unsure whether the proposed project is an audit or research, you should contact the relevant
Trust R&D Department with details of the project to ascertain this.

Research APEPs

Research projects allow students gain exposure to a topic, acquire new knowledge and skills using
data that is collected in addition to that of routine care.

Ethical Approval for Research Projects

It is entirely the supervisors responsibility to ensure that ethical approval is obtained well
in advance of the deadline of 20th January. The task of dealing with ethical approval must
NEVER be delegated to students, and students should never be asked to discuss research
projects with a Research Ethics Committee.

1. When a project is registered by a student on as research the MB ChB APEP Administrator will
ask the supervisor for their ethics approval reference.
2. The supervisor will provide the reference as evidence of having ethical approval, this also
indicates there is a sponsor organisation which will underwrite the project.
3. The ethics approval reference will then be recorded by the MB ChB APEP Administrator for
evidence of ethics approval.

The supervisor may wish to demonstrate the process of how to apply for research ethics to the
student, as long as the student does not carry out the process of submission alone.

Approval must be obtained before the deadline below and this often involves submission of the
IRAS application form several months in advance - Integrated Research Application System;
emphasising the need to select a research project in plenty of time.


Students undertaking a research project who have not received ethics approval or confirmation by 20 January
2017 will not be able to do the research project and will have to do a non research project, either with the same
supervisor or another supervisor.

Requirements for Supervisors for Research Projects That Do Not Require Ethics

In some instances a research APEP does not require ethical approval and in this instance the
supervisor should email confirmation of this to the MB ChB APEP Administrator, before Friday
20 January 2017.

If the evidence of Ethics Committee approval or email confirmation that the project does not
require approval is not provided by the deadline for submission, the project will not be approved
and the project type will be changed to a non-research project.

For enquiries relating to ethics approval, please contact the Research Ethics, Governance and
Integrity Team or telephone 0161 275 2046.

Supervisors also need to obtain approval for all proposed research projects from the relevant
NHS R&D Committee, in accordance with the Trusts Research governance procedures (unless
the project requires REC approval other than NHS such as UREC). This approval is necessary for
governance reasons and to provide insurance cover.

Good Clinical Practice (GCP) Training

GCP training may be necessary for students undertaking research. This can be achieved via an
online course through the Faculty; contact the MB ChB APEP Administrator for details.

Applicants have to register for GCP training and then their account can be accessed by using their
University of Manchester email address. The research office will check who has registered, who
has partially completed GCP training and who has completed training. Once completed, a GCP
certificate can be printed and a copy should be lodged with the research office to add to our
register of those who have been GCP trained.

Participation of Students in Research Projects

Any supervisor wishing to recruit students on the MB ChB Programme should be aware that the
MB ChB Programme is not responsible for recruiting MB ChB students for research activities on
behalf of potential supervisors. This is because the Programme must be outside of this process to
avoid any risk of students perceiving that the Programme is endorsing or requiring the students
to participate in research activity. The decision to participate will be for the student alone (the
decision must be free from duress and the student must know exactly to what they agree).

Posting Volunteer Opportunities on 1Med Buzz

A great place to ask fellow students to complete questionnaires or

surveys linked to your APEP is on 1Med Buzz under the
opportunities section.


Project Selection and Registration

Selection and Registration

It is the students responsibility to organise their own APEP.

Students must select a project and supervisor as follows:

1. Check the MedLea APEP Offerings for new APEP projects from 24 October 2016.
2. Submit an Expression of Interest (EOI) to alert the supervisor.
3. Contact the supervisor and arrange to discuss the project with them. The project is still
available to other students who can also submit EOIs until the supervisor accepts them.
4. Once accepted, the student can formally register the project via MedLea prior to Friday 25
November 2016 a link will appear in the To Do section on the students MedLea (1Med)
5. The supervisor must confirm the students registration to complete the process.

Any student who fails to register by this deadline will be required to attend an interview with
Professor Neil Pendleton, the MB ChB Programme Academic Lead for APEP.

For further information about choosing a supervisor please watch the Vimeo on how to select an
APEP Project.

New Supervisors

If students wish to do an APEP with a supervisor not already on the approved list, they should
double check that the supervisor has not previously been approved by looking up the supervisor
on MedLea, this is indicated by having PO or APEP SUPERVISOR" in their Status/grade.

It is possible for students to arrange their APEP with a supervisor who is not registered, provided
The supervisor is based at a site attached to the Faculty of Biology, Medicine and
Health, its affiliated Teaching Hospitals and General Practices
The supervisor is a Consultant or General Practitioner (Specialist Registrars, Nurses
and family members are not allowed to supervise)
The supervisor is a University member of staff at grade 7 or above
The supervisor submits a New APEP Supervisor proposal form for approval and confirms
acceptance of their students project registration via MedLea.

Deadline for submission of the New Supervisor Form: Friday 20 January 2017.

Following successful completion of their first APEP students project, supervisors will be
permitted to accept the specified number of students allowed for existing supervisors (see
Existing Supervisors).

New supervisors who have previously supervised PhD, MSc or final year undergraduate
dissertation to successful completion can take on 4 MB ChB students (2 conducting original
research and 2 APEPs involving secondary data analysis, critical appraisal, systematic review,
service evaluation etc.

New supervisors who have no previous experience of supervising APEPs, final year
undergraduate or postgraduate dissertations can only accept 2 MB ChB students.

Existing Supervisors

All existing supervisors are able to accept 4 MB ChB students for projects of either type (research
or non-research).

Changing Supervisor

The MB ChB Programme recognises that in some circumstances students may wish to change
their APEP and supervisor following registration. Although this is possible, students should note
this needs to be approved and there is a deadline for consideration of this request post
registration of Friday 31 March 2017. After this deadline a change cannot take place unless
there are exceptional circumstances, for example:
failure to obtain and provide the ethical approval reference and R&D approval for research
supervision delegated entirely to someone unsuitable
an inappropriately large number of MB ChB students accepted for supervision by an
individual supervisor
two or more MB ChB students participating in, or collaborating on, the same project under
the same supervisor (see SECTION 9)
repeating a project from the previous year (see Plagiarism and Assessment of the Written
For approval to change a supervisor, students should submit a case describing why this is
necessary including evidence students have communicated this to their original supervisor. The
case must be sent for consideration to Professor Neil Pendleton, MB ChB Programme Lead for
APEPs via the MB ChB APEP Administrator.

District General Hospitals (DGH)

Students are welcome to arrange their APEP with supervisors in DGHs affiliated to the University
of Manchester but should be aware that the Hospital may not provide accommodation. If the
Hospital can provide accommodation please bear in mind we do not have any funds for this.

Any student intending to go to a DGH in Wigan must contact Carmen Barrett and Amy Nolan,
soon after signing up with a supervisor to inform them about their plans: Tel: 01942 822393.

Presenting APEP at Conferences
Students are encouraged to present their PEP work at national or international conferences.
Guidance on how to achieve this is available alongside information on how to apply for a 50
bursary to help you with the costs of conference presentations.

Please follow the link below for more information

Project Work and Supervision
Supervision Before the APEP Period

The student should contact the APEP supervisor well before the start of the APEP period
to clarify:
Details of the project
Expectations of the student
Expectations of the supervisor
Consequently, before the start of the APEP period, discussions between the student and
supervisor should lead to the formulation of objectives and a working plan for a specific project
and students should be encouraged to undertake background reading in the area.

Project Summary eForm for APEP

The APEP Project Summary aims to facilitate student/supervisor engagement early in Year 3.
Early engagement enables students to be involved in project development, research governance,
identifying challenges to planned study and identification of new opportunities are realised.

In February of the academic year of APEP, students and supervisors will receive an alert via email
that the Project Summary eForm for APEP is live. Students and supervisors are expected to
communicate with each other to review the form sections for completion. The student can then
complete the eForm using the information from this communication. The student must submit the
eForm by the end of February.

The eForm content can be modified before submission but not after. Submission implies
completion of an approved version by the student and supervisor. A new Project Summary
eForm can be submitted at any time before the APEP later that academic year. The eForms will be
stored in a date ordered format so that the most recent can easily be seen by both student and
supervisor. The supervisor will receive a copy of the completed eForm.

The eForm is expected to be an accurate summary of the planned APEP at the time of
submission. However, projects evolve for many reasons over time. The submission of the eForm
is a requirement of successful completion of APEP. For a more detailed explanation of the
Project Summary eForm and copy for review see Section 11.

Supervision During the APEP Period

The student should have made an appointment to meet the supervisor in the first week of
the APEP period to:
discuss the project
agree an action plan, including aims and objectives
arrange regular meetings, at least once every week, to discuss the students progress with
the APEP. If the supervisor is away at any time during the APEP period, a colleague who is

aware of the project should be available to the student (see Responsibilities of Supervisors).
inform the supervisor of mandatory or required MB ChB programme events, so that they are
aware of the absence.

Students who require planned absence for any reason during their APEP must have the
permission from the Teaching Hospital Education Sector to do so. This is not the supervisors

Students are solely committed to their APEP with one exception: the MB ChB programme has
agreed that students are required to attend appointments with their Academic Advisor to develop
their PPDportfolio. This cannot be specifically timetabled until a period prior to such
appointments, but students are expected to give their supervisors as much notice as possible.

The supervisor should review the students progress after one week. By this time, the
student should have completed an outline of the written report. This is a crucial time at which
modifications can be made, so that the project can be completed before the deadline,
remembering that students have a relatively short period in which to complete a substantial piece
of work.

For audit and research projects, data collection should be completed within 3 4
weeks, to allow sufficient time for analysis, writing up and preparing the oral presentation. The
student should:
show the supervisor the written work well before the submission deadline
prepare for the oral presentation a week or two before the date of the presentation.

APEP Supervisor Workshops

Workshops are organised annually and are bookable for new or experienced supervisors: - (Select Supervision)

During the workshops, the participants have the opportunity to:

discuss how to plan, design and manage a project
discuss solutions to practical problems
consider the process of giving feedback to students

APEP Oral Exam Mandatory Training

Examiners of the oral presentation sessions of the APEP assessment are required to attend a
training workshop. They will be contacted by the MB ChB APEP Administrator informing them
of the training dates.

If an examiner misses the training or cannot attend for specific reasons, there is the opportunity
to undertake training online. Contact the MB ChB APEP Administrator for more details.

Statistics, Design and Evaluation
During the design phase, it is imperative that students consider the statistical evaluation of the
data. The supervisor is responsible for advising the student on the design and analysis of the
project. Statisticians within the University and Sectors are available to help with statistical
queries, which cannot be answered by the supervisor (see below). Students are encouraged to
make contact with a statistical adviser early during the APEP period so that potential problems in
data collection and analysis can be prevented.

Do not be too ambitious: remember that a small well-designed project is preferable to a large
diffuse one
Make sure that your project design is as simple as possible, while remaining compatible with
your aims
Make sure that the statistical analysis is as simple as possible but consistent with the design
for the data collection
Do not use either complicated designs or sophisticated methods of analysis, which neither
you nor your supervisor fully understands. You will not get marks for unnecessarily technical
or complicated analyses and certainly not if you get them wrong!
Do not ask too many questions; i.e., do not record too many variables. Every time you add
another variable to your list ask yourself do I really need this information?
Pilot any questionnaire you are planning to use and then revise. Time how long it takes to
complete the questionnaire as this may limit the amount of data you may be able to collect in
the time available for data collection.
The greater the sample size of your project the greater confidence you will have in your
result, therefore make sure you aim for an adequate number of subjects. Formal power or
sample size calculations are usually not necessary but you should try to use some common
sense. Can you really learn anything from just three patients in each group? Although most
statistical tests require a minimum of 30 subjects, please do not worry if this is not achieved;
recruit as many as you can given your available resources.
Where your project is based on a questionnaire, think carefully as to how much data you may
be able to collect in the limited time available for data collection.
Try to sort it out first and then use your statistical adviser to check a few things that neither
you nor your supervisor fully understands. Do not use the statistician as a substitute for your

The Statistics Introductory Lecture will be held in: Lecture Theatre 1,

Stopford Building 2pm, on Wednesday 29 March 2017

Statistical Support (except for Lancashire Teaching Hospital see note below)

Students will be able to obtain statistical support/advice via the Piazza system; an online forum
especially designed for education. Students will be able to either:
i) ask simple general questions via the Piazza system
ii) request up to three one to one sessions (clinics) with a statistical advisor
iii) post specific questions directly to the designated statistical advisor

Lancashire Teaching Hospital Support

Students completing their projects at Lancashire Teaching Hospitals Preston have separate
statistical support and should contact Zoe Cross. for Statistical
Support & Statistical Advice appointments


Additional statistical support is also provided via the online forum piazza
We will be using Piazza for class discussion, general statistical questions and to request one to
one statistical advice meetings. The system is highly catered to getting you help fast and
efficiently from classmates, the Biostatistics team and your designated statistical advisor. Rather
than emailing questions to the teaching staff, we encourage you to post your questions on Piazza.
If you have any problems or feedback for the developers, email

To find our class page click and log in:

For anyone using piazza for the first time and wishes to post a question or request a one to one
meeting please see the following steps:
- Once logged in, make sure you are located in the ST 101 class using the drop down menu
located in the top menu bar to the left.
- To post a question click New Post and a messaging screen should appear.
- Define the Post type as a Question
- For a general question choose to Post to the Class Group determined by the location of your
APEP (Salford, Christie, Wythenshawe or Central i.e. University of Manchester and Central
Manchester hospital)
- You can then tag the Question to help identify the method of response (note these will be
updated periodically as common questions are identified).
- Any general questions will be responded to by the assigned statistician monitoring the
general questions for that week.
- An appointment request should be used if you wish to request your first one to one
appointment, at which point the group administrator will assign you to the next available
statistician who will be your designated statistical advisor for the remainder of your APEP
- Once assigned you can then ask direct questions to them or set up further one to one
meetings by using the Post to: Individual instructor radial button. Note: up to three half

hour one to one meetings are permitted.
- Complete the message by adding a suitable title and including the question to be answered.
- Press submit.

Please be aware, the further resources relating to information regarding statistical advice and
statistical computing software (that are also in this document) can be found in the Resources
tab at in the top bar.

Statistics Advice Clinics (except for Lancashire Teaching Hospital)

Lancashire Teaching Hospital Support

Students completing their projects at Lancashire Teaching Hospitals Preston have separate
statistical support and should contact Zoe Cross. for Statistical
Support & Statistical Advice appointments

Please note that the supervisor is responsible for advising students about the design and analysis
of research projects in the first instance. Depending on the requirements of the project and the
experience of the supervisor this may be sufficient. The statistical clinic sessions will give
individual advice for research projects where required. These sessions are provided by the
statisticians in the Centre for Biostatistics and the base Hospitals. Due to demand these are
limited to a maximum which varies by sector.

In order to make best use of the clinic sessions, students should discuss the project outline and
statistical aspects of their study with their supervisor prior to an appointment.

It would be beneficial if you could bring a written outline of the project to the discussion with the
statistical adviser.

What you CANNOT expect from the statistical advice clinics:

Someone to do your statistical analysis for you
Someone to input your data for you
Someone to type your research report or produce any of the required figures or tables for you
Advice without a prior appointment. Statisticians from the Centre for Biostatistics are not
available outside the clinic sessions
More than sector-specific number of advice appointments (usually 3)

Statistical advice appointments must be booked in advance (via piazza)

If for any reason you cannot keep your appointment you must cancel and explain. If you fail to
cancel an appointment you may find you no longer have access to statistical advice.
If you have any difficulties you can also contact Wendy Lamb
0161 275 5764 (internal 55764).

Software for Statistics and Resources

Students can download self-instruction booklets and relevant materials to aid in the analysis of
their project data from

This includes instructions on:

how to download the statistical package
entering data
descriptive statistics
simple graphics
basic inference including the chi-squared test and the t-test
simple linear regression

SPSS (version 22) is available to students to download from the IT Services website Students are advised to obtain the software well in advance.

For StatsDirect, a limited time trial version can be downloaded from
Students can also request a license by contacting the IT Service Desk.

Critical Review Websites

Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine in Oxford:

Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) and Evidence- based Practice:
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (University of York):
The Cochrane Collaboration:
Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (University of Toronto):

Statistical Information Resources

Altman DG (1991). Practical Statistics for Medical Research. London: Chapman & Hall
Armitage P & Berry G (2002). Statistical Methods in Medical Research (4th Edition). Oxford:
Bland M (2000). An Introduction to Medical Statistics (3rd Edition). Oxford: Oxford University
Campbell MJ & Machin D (1999) Medical Statistics: A Commonsense Approach. West Sussex.
John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Gardner MJ & Altman DG. (2000) Statistics with Confidence: Confidence Intervals and
Statistical Guidelines.2nd Ed. London: BMJ Publishing.
Kirkwood BR & Sterne JA. (2003) Essential Medical Statistics. Oxford: Blackwell Science.

Assessments and Feedback
Formative Assessed Elements

Attendance and Punctuality

The expected attendance for APEP is 100%. Students and supervisors agree a weekly timetable
in which the student records their attendance and provides this as evidence to the supervisor
who signs this off. The minimum expectation for agreed attendance will be 80%. Any absences
should be taken with the knowledge and agreement of the supervisor. Unauthorised absences
totalling more than 20% should be recorded in the students marksheet under attendance.

Attendance and Absence

Students must follow the guidance on this subject provided in the MB ChB Programme Handbook. In addition, the supervisor
must be informed in writing of absence due to illness or any other reason.

Performance and Engagement

Supervisors will confirm that the students performance and engagement has been satisfactory
and assess their ability to work independently, with others, and to reflect on their work. Any
significant concern about a students performance or engagement should be raised immediately
with the relevant sector administrators to take appropriate action such as referral to the PEP
Lead and/or students Academic Advisor.

The supervisor will be asked to provide formative feedback about the students performance and
engagement via the marksheet. The criteria below should be used by the supervisor to assess the
student in this regard.

Motivation, curiosity, enthusiasm and commitment

Originating research or clinical questions and ways of testing/addressing them
Application of background knowledge to the scientific/clinical problem
Grasp of research methods and statistics
Ability to identify own strengths and weaknesses
Ability to identify and confront difficulties during the project
Determination and ability to carry through ideas to completion
Planning, organisation, time management: realistic scheduling, complete tasks on time
Setting priorities
Ability to work well independently and within a team
Utilise resources, information technology, technical knowledge and experience

Management of Concerns about Attendance, Performance or Engagement

The PEP marksheet is now structured with two sections. The first is a formative report of the
students attendance, performance and engagement using the above criteria. The second section
is the summative assessment of the written report.

Attendance, Performance and Engagement are not summative elements, however if your supervisor
reports concerns this will lead to a formal review of your behavior and professionalism.

If a students performance and engagement is recorded as unsatisfactory and the supervisor has
responded to confirm they believe that this should be followed up and/or the student is marked
unsatisfactory for attendance, the following actions will occur:
The MB ChB Programme Academic Lead for PEP will clarify the grounds for this concern, if
necessary with further communication with the supervisor.
If the MB ChB Programme Academic Lead for PEP confirms there is evidence of problems
with performance and/or engagement, they will write a report referring the student to the
relevant Base Hospital Dean.
The supervisor will be notified of the outcome of their concern.

Summative Assessment of the Written Report

Supervisors should help students by providing constructive criticism of draft copies of the
written report.

If a student is experiencing problems with completing their report or experiencing difficulties,

they should speak to their supervisor and their Hospital Administrator, who should inform the
MB ChB APEP Administrator.

Word Count

The required word count for written reports for the APEP is 5,000 to 10,000 words. The word
count refers to all other text including that in tables, figures, quotations and appendices and only
excludes references. This maximum upper limit of 10,000 words applies equally to all APEPs.


Written reports, for both research and non-research projects, should also be:
Word-processed with font size 10 or greater, text in double line spacing and pages numbered
Submitted through MedLea (1Med) with a maximum file size of 4MB (file compression
accepted only with Zip format). A file of greater than this size will be rejected automatically,
but you can reduce the size by using PDF format.

Deadline for submitting the written report online

The deadline for submission of reports is Friday 9 June 2017 12 midday. This deadline is
fixed. No supervisor or any other member of staff has the authority to grant an exemption or an
extension for any student. Any student who fails to complete their project and/or submit their
written report online by the deadline will be penalised and receive an overall grade FAIL.

Written Report

Inability to submit a written report on time due to technical issues such as computer failure, USB/CD
issues, internet failure etc will not be accepted

Students should keep separate copies of their report for themselves.

Please note: academic malpractice (including plagiarism) is potentially a problem for the APEP
written component of the assessments (see Patient Data and Confidentiality).

Written Report - Definition for Grades Awarded

The supervisor will be sent details via email regarding how to assess the APEP student online. It
should be ideally completed within the last week of the APEP period it must be completed
online by Friday 23 June 2017.

The grades awarded for each assessment domain and their definitions are shown in the table
below. The pass mark for the module is 50%. Examples of criteria to guide the assigning of marks
are provided for each category of assessment below.

Instructions to assessor Circle a mark between 1 and 10 to signify your answer to ALL of
the following points regarding the APEP report. The expected content of each section of the
report is described in the APEP Guidelines.

Mark 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Very Good
Grade Fail Satisfactory Good Excellent (Distinction)

Profoundly Severely
Description Inadequate Insufficient Sufficient Good Very Good Excellent Outstanding Exceptional
Inadequate Inadequate


All reports should be in the following sequence and sections:

1. Cover page
2. Declaration
3. Abbreviations
4. Abstract
5. Introduction
6. Methods
7. Results
8. Discussion
9. Conclusion
10.Bibliography and References

Cover page
You should state:
Your full name
University Student ID number in the top right hand corner
Title of the project
Name of supervisor
Word count in bottom right hand corner

Clearly specifying the various aspects of the project work that were undertaken by the student
and those undertaken by the supervisor or any other party, see Written Report Declaration

Abstract (10%)
A summary of your projects condensed into a short paragraph (no more than 250 words). You
should include a brief outline of the following:
Objectives of your project/study
Explanation of methods chosen
Summary of important results

Grade Fail Satisfactory Good Very Excellent

Mark 1,2,3,4 5 6 7 8,9,10
Outside word 200-250 200-250 200-250 200-250 words
Criteria limit words words words Excellent
Deficiencies in Appropriate Good Very good structure and
structure structure structure structure selection of
Ambiguous Describes Describes and content
project project selection of Clear
Does not content
describe project undertaken undertaken
undertaken Clear Clear

Introduction (10%)
Introduce the subject you will be studying, including context or background of the question being
addressed. An appraisal of literature: organised, relevant, critical appraisal but not pedantic,
reporting impartial and accurate. Clearly state aims/objectives: the question may be a research
or clinical question (e.g. In a patient with acute asthma, is salbutamol more effective when
administered with a nebuliser than with a large volume spacer?).

Grade Fail Satisfactory Good Very Good Excellent

Mark 1,2,3,4 5 6 7 8,9,10
Criteria Aims not stated Aims stated Aims stated As Good plus As Excellent
Context and context and context Critical plus
incompletely described described appraisal of Excellent
described Literature Literature literature statement of
Disorganised appraised appraised Very good use aims and
Appropriate use Appropriate of figures and description of
Inadequate context
appraisal of of figures and use of figures tables
literature tables and tables Very good Excellent use of
mainly accurate Accurate and structure figures and
Ambiguous tables
and relevant relevant Clear and well
Inaccurate or content Accurate and
irrelevant Mostly clear written
Good relevant content
structure Lucid
Clear Demonstrates
understanding of

Method (10%)
Describe what was done to find the answers and including
Study design, subjects, procedures, data analyses and statement of ethical approval for
research reports
Observations, data collection methods, procedures by which information/skills were sought
to address the question for non-research reports

Grade Fail Satisfactory Good Very Good Excellent

Mark 1,2,3,4 5 6 7 8,9,10
Criteria Lacking Mostly clear Clear As Good plus As Very Good plus
clear description of description of Very clear description Excellent description
description methods methods of methods (design, of methods (design,
of methods (design, (design, subjects, data subjects, data
Disorganised subjects, data subjects, data analysis, etc.) analysis, etc.
analysis, etc.) analysis, etc.)
Ambiguous Demonstrates a sound Excellent
Adequate Well understanding of organisation
Inaccurate organisation organised
or irrelevant methods involved Demonstrates an
content Generally Accurate and excellent
accurate and relevant understanding of
relevant Complete methods involved

Results (20%)
Mentions what was found and includes
Data description and analyses for research
Summary from studies included for a systematic review
Own observations presented clearly
Tables, graphs, figures and textual quotations (qualitative research) used appropriately

Grade Fail Satisfactory Good Very Good Excellent

Mark 1,2,3,4 5 6 7 8,9,10
Criteria Incorrect or Mainly correct Correct As Good plus As Very Good plus
irrelevant Mainly Appropriate to Clear link between Correct and
Disorganised appropriate to aims text and figures complete
ambiguous aims Link between Very clear Clearly related to
Inappropriate Mainly clear text and figures Good use of a aims
or insufficient Adequate Clear range of figures Appropriate level of
use of figures organisation Well organised and tables detail
and tables Appropriate Very well organised
Appropriate use
use of figures of figures and Creative approach
and tables tables to visualisation of

Discussion (20%)
Strengths and weaknesses of the methods
Meaning and implications of the principal findings in relation to the stated aims/objectives
Results in relation to existing knowledge
Relevance to medical practice and guidelines from professional societies
Areas of uncertainty, unanswered questions, areas of further work

Grade Fail Satisfactory Good Very Good Excellent

Mark 1,2,3,4 5 6 7 8,9,10
Criteria Lacks a summary Summarises As Satisfactory As Good plus As Very Good
of principal principal findings plus Relates key plus
findings Relates results to Clearly relates results to Demonstrates a
Does not relate stated aims results to stated previous work, high level of
results to stated Relates most aims discussing insight
aims or previous results to previous Relates key reasons for Selects key
work work results to similarity and points
Fails to draw previous work differences
Draws appropriate Discusses
appropriate conclusions Describes Analyses significance
conclusions strengths and strengths and and next steps
Basic description limitations
No discussion of of strengths and limitations Excellent
strengths or limitations Clear and organisation
weaknesses correct
Generally clear
Disorganised Well organised
Ambiguous organisation Selects key
Incorrect or Mainly correct and points
irrelevant relevant

A concise summary statement reflecting strength of the methods and evidence presented

References (10%)
Listed correctly and in a consistent style. For further information on referencing please refer to
the Universitys referencing guides.

Grade Fail Satisfactory Good Very Good Excellent

Mark 1,2,3,4 5 6 7 8,9,10
Criteria Inappropriate Generally Appropriate As Good As Very Good
choice of appropriate choice of plus plus
references choice of references Good choice Excellent choice
Inadequate references Uses range of of references of references
range of Uses range of sources Includes both
sources sources Accurate highly cited and
Inaccurate and Mainly accurate Complete recent
incomplete Mainly references
referencing Consistent
complete style

Presentation and Structure (10%)

Grade Fail Satisfactory Good Very Good Excellent

Mark 1,2,3,4 5 6 7 8,9,10
Criteria Inadequate Report Report As Good plus As Very Good
organisation organised and organised and Report well plus
and subdivided subdivided organised and Report very
subdivision of appropriately appropriately subdivided well organised
report Layout Layout Layout very and subdivided
Deficiencies in generally sensible good, Layout
layout sensible All tables and including excellent,
Tables and Most tables and figures sensible page including
figures not figures referenced in breaks and sensible page
referenced in referenced in the text justified breaks and
the text the text margins justified
Consistent margins
heading styles

Use of English (10%)

Grade Fail Satisfactory Good Very Good Excellent

Mark 1,2,3,4 5 6 7 8,9,10
Criteria Inadequate Use of English Use of English As Good As Very Good
standard of English mainly good good plus plus
Large numbers of Writing style Writing style Effective use Use of English
typographical or appropriate good of English excellent
spelling errors Few spelling or Very few Writing style Writing style
Inappropriate or typographical spelling or very good excellent
informal writing errors typographical No spelling or
style Most errors typographical
Abbreviations and abbreviations Abbreviations errors
acronyms not and acronyms and acronyms
defined defined defined

The final mark is calculated by adding the marks awarded for each section with weighting as
indicated, with maximum possible mark 100.
Note: This translates directly onto the grades used in other PEP modules, namely:

Fail 49 or below
Satisfactory 50-69
Honours 70-79
Distinction 80-100

Penalties for Late Submission and Failure to Submit

This will be implemented after marking. There will be a reduction of 10 marks for every 24 hour
period after the submission deadline up to 5 days. Please note the examples below of the effects
of late submission and this can result in a fail grade. If the report has not yet been
submitted after 5 calendar days after the submission deadline the mark awarded will be 0

Any student submitting late will be graded unsatisfactory for work habits and performance.
Examples of outcome of late submission mark reduction if student awarded mark of 85

Number of Hours after Number of Initial mark Initial mark

days late the deadline marks (85) (65)
1 Up to 24 10 75 55
2 24-48 20 65 45*
3 48-72 30 55 35*
4 72-96 40 45* 25*
5 96-120 50 35* 15*
More than 5 >120 100 0* 0*
Note: * indicates fail grade outcome

Penalty for Exceeding the Word Count

This will be implemented after marking. If the word count of the report (excluding references) is
more than 10% greater than the maximum allowed, the mark will be capped below the grade
Distinction (maximum mark 79%).

Summative Assessment of Oral Presentation

All students are required to present the results of their APEP at a presentation day. These are
organised at a Hospital bases or at the University with some degree of specialty allocation e.g.
obstetrics and gynaecology presentations usually take place at the Manchester Childrens

Supervisors should help students with constructive criticism of practice presentations.

Students who are presenting must attend the whole morning or afternoon session.
The dress code for oral presentations is smart casual.
It is not mandatory for supervisors to attend. Supervisors who are able to attend their
students presentation should ideally attend the whole session to reduce disruption for the
presenting students. However, if the supervisor has commitments and are only able to attend
their students presentation the supervisor should arrive at least 20 minutes prior to and
after to allow for the variations in presentation timing differences.

A timetable for the presentation days is prepared in advance and circulated to all supervisors and
students in an email. The timetable will detail the students allocated venue and session.
Additional specific PowerPoint upload instructions will also be noted for each venue. Students
are advised to also take a USB stick as a back-up on the day.

Students are allocated 5 minutes to present their project using visual aids. All venues have a
data projector and a computer for PowerPoint presentations. After the 5 minute presentation,
time is made available for questioning by the assessors and members of the audience. See
Assessing Oral Presentations for more information.

Any student who fails to attend oral presentations will receive a fail grade.
The oral presentations will be on 14 -16 June 2017

Oral Presentation Assessment Criteria

These are listed in the assessment sheets given to the assessors:

Content clear and uncluttered
Structure includes introduction, aims, methods, results and conclusions
Delivery clear and free of jargon
Visual aids legible and complement oral presentation
Keeping to time of 5 minutes
Handling questions politely and precisely

Possible Grade and Grade Definition
Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Excellent
Poor time management and Satisfactory on most criteria Performance outstanding on
organisation the list of criteria
Content and slides deficient Well organised and
or excessive systematic approach for a 5
min delivery

The assessors should:

Independently assess each student's presentation and complete an Oral Assessment form
provided for each student presenting
Meet in the break or at the end of the whole session and agree on the final grade for each
student. When assessors differ greatly, the reasons for the differences should be debated and
a consensus reached

Feedback from Supervisors to Students during APEP

Supervisors must give feedback to students throughout their APEP about their:
Attendance and punctuality
Performance and engagement. If a students conduct is unsatisfactory, feedback should be
given at an early stage in order that the student may address any issues to improve their
performance overall. If, however, students fail to make the necessary changes, supervisors
are able to award an overall mark of unsatisfactory at the end of the APEP. Supervisors are
not able to award a mark of unsatisfactory for work and attendance if they have not had a
halfway meeting with the student.
Written report
Oral presentation

Students and supervisors should arrange a final feedback session in the last week of the APEP
period to review overall performance in the APEP. This should form the basis of the supervisors
assessment feedback.

As part of the feedback process, students will have the opportunity to see the written comments
of their supervisors and external assessors.

The online assessment form provides grades and written feedback from supervisor to student
covering their Applied PEP in line with University of Manchesters student Feedback Policy.

Final Grading Decisions

If the student is rated Unsatisfactory for either attendance or performance and engagement, this
will be reported to the Base Hospital Dean for further consideration.

The grades from the written report and oral presentation assessment will be considered as
To achieve an overall grade above fail the student must pass both written report and oral
If both components are passed then the overall grade will be the same as that awarded for the
written report

A final grade Fail will be awarded if any one of the following applies:
Written report not submitted by the deadline and mark reduction results in value below 49
Written report graded fail by supervisor and confirmed to be fail by a second assessor
(student will have to correct the written report according to the feedback of the
supervisor/second assessor for submission as second attempt by 7 July 2017 - TBC).
Student does not attend the oral presentation or gets a fail in the oral presentation (student
will have to repeat the oral, having received oral and written feedback as a 2nd attempt on 12
July 2017 - TBC).

A second assessor will examine the written report if a fail grade is awarded by the supervisor.

A final grade Honours will be awarded if the written report is graded distinction and oral
presentation is graded Excellent in the first attempt. This will contribute 1 Honours Point. A
defined number of Honours Points have to be acquired during the Undergraduate course for the
student to be eligible for an Honours Degree. In line with University policy, Excellent cannot be
awarded in a second attempt when only Pass or Fail grades are available.

Feedback from students

Students will be asked to complete an eForm at the end of the project period and informed via


Academic Malpractice, Appeals and Mitigation

Academic malpractice:

Mitigating circumstances:

Academic appeals:

Plagiarism and assessment of the written report

All written work submitted by students as required by APEP is reviewed for evidence of
plagiarism. This is performed by the MB ChB Programme APEP Management Team using
data generated from Turnitin software following submission of the written report.
Supervisors can also report evidence of plagiarism they have identified by contacting the
MB ChB APEP Administrator.


Patient Data and Confidentiality

Information security

Personal Data is governed by the Data Protection Act and there are strict rules governing its
use which you must be aware of. A Brief Guide to Data Protection from the University can be
found on the website.
Each Trust will have specific rules and procedures which you must adhere to regarding the
use of patient data. Patient identifiable data must NEVER be kept on laptops, PCs, or
portable storage unless the device or the file has been encrypted. Information on encryption
at the University can be found on the University website.
Patient identifiable data must NEVER be emailed unless it is contained in an encrypted file
Files must be deleted in accordance with the arrangements agreed with data subjects or the
ethics approval procedure for projects.
Papers containing patient identifiable data must be kept secure in locked storage until they
are no longer required when they must be shredded.
If personal data is lost, stolen or disclosed to unauthorised persons you must inform your
supervisor immediately.

Clinical images

It is permissible for students to use images without specific consent in their assignments as long
as the following conditions apply:
1. The images were obtained for clinical purposes and not research purposes.
2. The images are anonymous and non-identifiable (i.e. facial images would be unacceptable).
3. The permission of the custodian of the image (those releasing the image) has been obtained
for us in the students project. The use of such images would not require ethical review.

Useful References and Resources
Best BETS (Best Evidence Topics)

CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials)

Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: The Medline database. BMJ 1997; 315: 180 - 183

Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: getting your bearings (deciding what the paper is about).
BMJ 1997; 315: 243 - 246

Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: Assessing the methodological quality of published papers.
BMJ 1997; 315: 305 308

Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: Statistics for the non- statistician. I: Different types of data
need different statistical tests. BMJ 1997; 315: 364 366

Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: Statistics for the non- statistician. II: Significant relations
and their pitfalls. BMJ
1997; 315: 422 - 425

Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: Papers that report drug trials. BMJ 1997; 315: 480 483

Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: Papers that report diagnostic or screening tests. BMJ 1997;
315: 540 543

Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: Papers that tell you what things cost (economic analyses).
BMJ 1997; 315: 596 599

Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: Papers that summarise other papers (systematic reviews and
meta-analyses). BMJ
1997; 315: 672 675

Greenhalgh T & Taylor R. How to read a paper: Papers that go beyond numbers (qualitative
Research). BMJ 1997; 315: 740

Sackett DL, Straus SE, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. Evidence-based Medicine:
How to Practice and Teach EBM. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone Second Edition,

This link provides useful online resources such as:

Report writing, referencing in your writing, revising, structuring for effective essays, introduction
to statistics, proofreading your work and avoiding plagiarism

Appendix: Handy Tools for Students and Supervisors
Project summary eForm questions

How do I complete the eForm?

The form is available on the eForms app on your iPad or through the website. There are a
number of subsections which have question style headings. They require either a single sentence
or short paragraph completion. All subsections are mandatory for completion; the form cannot
be submitted without an entry in each.

At the end of the eForm is a box for the supervisors email address which will ensure that a
copy is received by them. Only when the form is submitted is the requirement complete.

How much information should be in each section?

This is either a few words or sentences depending on the subsection. It is important that the
information is concise and meant only to act as outline of plans for the project. It is not meant to
be a detailed document such as a project application or protocol. Its use is to facilitate
engagement with your supervisor and avoid potential obstacles that can be resolved before it

Some sections of the Project Summary eForm answers suggest I need to do


Some parts of the eForm ask questions about research governance approvals and clinical audit
registrations. Their purpose is to stimulate you and your supervisor to reflect on the governance
needs of your APEP. They do not automatically indicate problems with your project and offer a
timely opportunity to resolve these before the APEP starts. As always, use the experience and
expertise of your supervisor to answer these. If you are still concerned, the teaching hospital
medical education department or the Division of Medical Education should be able to advise.

Does my APEP have to match the content of the Project Summary eForm?

The eForm is expected to be an accurate summary of your planned APEP at the time of
submission. However, projects evolve for many reasons over time. Thus your project may be
different to that recorded on the eForm when you start the APEP later in the academic year.

Although it is not required, you can of course submit more than one Project Summary eForm
before your APEP to reflect these changes, although this is not required.

What if, after I submit my Project Summary eForm, my supervisor is unhappy with
the content?

Again please note that you can submit a further Project Summary eForm that your supervisor
feels is more accurate. This is up to you and your supervisor to organise. The eForms will be
ordered so that the most contemporary version is clear with older versions available.

Will my Project Summary eForm be part of my APEP assessment?

No, the Project Summary eForm content will not be assessed or graded as one would see in an
examination. The content will not form part of your examined grade for APEP. However, you are
expected to submit a complete eForm by the specified deadline of the last day in February. This
will be monitored.

What happens if I do not submit a Project Summary eForm by the deadline?

Submission of Project Summary eForm is required as part of your APEP. If you do not submit by
the deadline the MB ChB APEP Administrator will identify this and inform you. You will be
required to explain your reason and provide a completed eForm. Failure to do so will result in the
MB ChB Programmes Academic Lead for APEP reviewing the case and informing your Hospital
Dean as a professionalism issue.


What is the provisional title for your Project?*

Please consult your supervisor if you are unsure

What are the aims of the Project?*

Expected outcomes?*

Describe the skills you are likely to need to

complete your Project*

Have you used the decision tool to see whether your

Project is research?* (see http://www.hra- ethics/.

What was the outcome?*

State the outcome of using the decision tool

Will your Project need to be registered as an audit?*

Will you require any special equipment or other

resources to complete your Project?*
Describe any that are required

Will you need access to patients or data?

How will this be organised? *

Next steps *
Consider what steps you need to take BEFORE
the start of your Project in March

Supervisor Email *
Please enter your supervisors email address. A copy of this form will
be sent to them to check the content. Supervisors should check the
sections and if there is any need to be changed a new Project
Summary. The eForms will be stored in a date ordered format so the
most recent can easily be seen by both you and the supervisor.

Monitoring and assessing progress during the APEP period

The following are provided on separate pages so that they may be easily photocopied:

Weekly Report
To be completed by the student with guidance from the supervisor
Useful to monitor discussions between student and supervisor and the student's
progress during the APEP period
Supervisors are advised to retain a photocopy of each completed weekly report

Student Timetable
To be completed by the student, with guidance from the supervisor
Likely to help the student with time management and planning of the project

Review and Record of Professional Development

Students should reflect on the knowledge, skills and attitudes that they acquire during the
APEP. Supervisors are encouraged to facilitate this. Students should keep the completed
form in their portfolio.

Weekly Report (DATE):


Project title:


Progress since meeting on (date):

Priorities for the coming week:

Longer term goals:



Agreed by: (Supervisor)

Student Project Timetable


Week 1

Week 2

Week 3

Week 4

Week 5

Week 6

Week 7

Week 8

Week 9

Week 10

Review and Record of Professional Development throughout the

Specific aims and Self assessment Reflection

objectives (5 v. confident to 1 not at all

Week Week Week

1-4 5-8 9-10

Critical review of

Research methodology

Planning and execution

Statistical analysis of
numerical data

Written presentation of the

project work

Discussion of the results

and their importance

Word processing and data

handling skills

Oral presentation skills


Written report declaration

This example declaration should be completed by the student and inserted as page 1 in the APEP
written report.

Declaration of Originality

I confirm that this assignment is my own work and that I have:

Read and understood the guidance on plagiarism

Clearly referenced, in both the text and the bibliography or

references, all sources used in the work

Fully referenced (including page numbers) and used inverted

commas for all text quoted from books, journals, web etc.

Provided the sources for all tables, figures, data etc. that are not
my own work

Not made use of the work of any other student(s) past or present
without acknowledgement.

This includes any of my own work, that has been previously, or

concurrently, submitted for assessment, either at this or any
other educational institution, including school.



I am aware of and understand the Universitys policy on plagiarism

and I certify that this assignment is my own work, except where
indicated by referencing, and that I have followed the good

Assessing oral presentations

Purpose of the oral presentation

The purpose is to assess the students ability to communicate the important aspects of their
project in a manner that fellow medical students would understand. This assesses the quality of
the presentation and not the scientific methods used. The latter are assessed from the written
report; see The Oral Presentation Assessment Criteria.

The assessors' panel

Each student's oral presentation will be assessed by 3 assessors. One of these 3 assessors will act
as a chairperson.

The assessors should meet before the session starts (approximately 15 minutes) to agree on the
procedure. The assessors should:
Independently assess each student's presentation and complete an oral assessment form
provided for each student presenting.
Meet during the break or at the end of the whole session and agree on the final grade for each
student. When assessors differ greatly, the reasons for the differences should be debated and
a consensus reached.
Return all the forms to the MB ChB APEP Administrator at the Division of Medical Education,
G11, Stopford Building, Manchester University, Oxford Road, M13 9PT.

The chairperson's tasks

This is not an onerous task and involves:

introducing the students.
ensuring that the student keeps ideally to the 5 minutes for the presentation (4-6 minutes is
deemed as satisfactory).
congratulating the student at the end of their presentation for their efforts, highlighting
something positive.
meeting with the other assessors at the end of the session to coordinate the assessment sheets
and decide a final grade for each student.
protecting the student from negative comments from the audience. Neither assessors nor the
audience should verbalise critical derogatory statements about the student, their supervisor or
their project.
inviting questions from the audience (not the students supervisor) for 2 minutes after each

Questions should:
allow students to clarify and elaborate points raised rather than demolish what has been
be challenging and fair.