The doctoral dissertation may also take the form of another work that meets the appropriate scientific criteria, provided that the doctoral candidate’s independent contribution to it can be verified. All doctoral dissertations should meet the following scholarly criteria: they must a) contain new scientific knowledge, b) demonstrate critical thinking on the doctoral candidate’s part, c) demonstrate profound familiarity with the field, d) demonstrate mastery of research methods and their application, e) be scientifically convincing, f) contain justified results, and g) demonstrate scientific integrity and adhere to the ethical norms of research.
The supervisor and the doctoral candidate must limit the topic and content of the dissertation in such a way that the degree can be completed in four years of full-time study.
The doctoral candidate is responsible for the content of the work submitted for the preliminary examination. The supervisor(s) are responsible for ensuring that the quality of the thesis is such that it can be submitted for preliminary examination. When it is time to start the preliminary examination process, the coordinating academic will make a formal proposal to the faculty for the appointment of the preliminary examiners and the opponent.
Preliminary examiners, the opponent, custos and grading committee are appointed by the Faculty Council. All the relevant information for the examiners and opponent on examining dissertation can be found below on this page.
Notice the changes in thesis examination process regarding the doctoral theses submitted for preliminary examination after 1 August 2025.
When examining a dissertation or a Licentiate thesis, particular consideration should be given to the following:
According to Rector’s decision (HY/11925/00.00.06.00/2024), a doctoral dissertation must consist of peer-reviewed scholarly publications or manuscripts accepted for publication, as well as a summarising report on the said documents (an article-based dissertation); or it must be a scholarly work in the name of the doctoral candidate alone and based on previously unpublished research results (a monograph). The doctoral dissertation may also take the form of another work that meets the appropriate scientific criteria, provided that the doctoral candidate’s independent contribution to it can be verified.
All doctoral dissertations should meet the following scholarly criteria:
they must
The doctoral dissertation must have a brief abstract of one to two pages, providing a summary of the dissertation and its key results. The abstract must outline the doctoral candidate’s objectives or research questions as well as the core research methods, results and conclusions.
Article-based dissertations
An article-based dissertation typically comprises 2-3 peer-reviewed scholarly articles related to a single topic and a summarising report which is considered the dissertation proper. The number of articles depends on the extent, the scientific quality and significance of the articles, the publishing forum, as well as, the own contribution of the writer. If the number of original articles is small (1), special attention is paid to high quality of the research and the amount of work done. In addition, the doctoral candidate is to indicate their significant contribution in the original articles of the dissertation with a report signed by the candidate and their supervisor. The report is to be more detailed than usually (with the accuracy of each individual test/experiment or analysis).
The doctoral candidate writes the summarising report, which is a synthesis of the articles in the dissertation including the literary review. The summarising report of an article-based dissertation must present the background, objectives, methods, material, results, discussion and conclusions of the research. The summarising report must be a balanced work based on both the publications included in the dissertation and the research literature.
In any co-authored publications, the doctoral candidate’s independent contribution must be clearly identifiable. For this purpose, the doctoral candidate and the supervisor draft a free-form report on the participation of the doctoral candidate at each stage of the research work. If the co-authored publication has been used in another dissertation, this must be mentioned in the report. The doctoral candidate should deliver the draft of the report on his or her contribution also to the other authors of the publication. The doctoral candidate shall deliver the report to the faculty when submitting the dissertation for preliminary examination and to the preliminary examiners, opponent and custos at a later date.
In case one or more of the articles have been previously used in some earlier dissertation, this information must be added to the end of the “List of original publications”.
Monograph dissertations
A monograph dissertation is a scholarly work issued under the name of the writer alone and based on independent research. Previously published work shall not be accepted as a monograph. Before completing the dissertation proper, however, the author of a monograph may publish articles on related topics and refer to these in the dissertation. Direct quotes from the dissertation cannot be published later under a research group. The length of a monograph dissertation is normally maximum 250 pages, including appendices and the list of references. Supervisors of monographs must take particular care to ensure the quality of the manuscript before it is submitted for preliminary examination.
Retaining the original research material
The author must retain the original research results pertaining to the dissertation at least as long as the processing of the dissertation at the Faculty is underway. The results must be presented to the Faculty or to Faculty-appointed assessors on request.
The examination process of doctoral dissertations comprises the following:
Preliminary examination instructions in detail can be found Instructions for students' article
When the dissertation manuscript is complete, the doctoral candidate must apply for its preliminary examination from the Faculty Council.
Article-based dissertations that contain an incomplete summarising report cannot be submitted for preliminary examination, but the matter can be suspended until the summarising report is polished or revised.
At the proposal of the coordinating academic, the Faculty Council will appoint two preliminary examiners who are familiar with the field of the dissertation. The preliminary examiners will issue a statement on the dissertation manuscript for the purpose of granting the permission to print and defend the dissertation.
Permission to print and defend the dissertation requires supporting statements from the preliminary examiners. Once the preliminary examiners have submitted their supporting statements, the Faculty will grant permission to print and defend the dissertation.
When pre-examiners are appointed before 1 August 2025, grading committee is proposed after recommending pre-examination statements, as previously. The Faculty Council appoints a dissertation grading committee for the public examination on the basis of the proposal of the coordinating academic.
There should be a minimum of two members who are allowed to participate in grading: The Opponent, the Custos and the Faculty representative. Custos can participate in the grading of the dissertation, if he/she is not a supervisor of the dissertation. In this case the Grading Committee includes the Opponent and the Custos.
The opponent must be a professor or docent (or have equivalent scientific qualifications) in one of the fields of research of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Helsinki or in a neighbouring field. The opponent must be from outside the faculty and, as a rule, from outside the University of Helsinki. The same principles of disqualification apply to both preliminary examiners and opponents. The opponent must not be involved in the dissertation research or in any co-authored publications with the author of the dissertation. He or she must be from a different division, clinic or research programme than the dissertation supervisor and the doctoral candidate. He or she must not represent the division, clinic, research programme or equivalent organisation where the dissertation has been registered, and he or she must not have cooperated with the dissertation supervisor closely or recently (in the last three years). A preliminary examiner can be appointed as opponent. The dissertation supervisors or thesis committee members cannot serve as opponents.
The custos serves as the regulator of the public examination and completes other duties as provided by the University.
Doctoral candidate’s home faculty council often appoints thesis main supervisor acting as custos of the public examination. The custos must be a professor or docent at the University of Helsinki (the docent does not need to be in an employment relationship with the university) or a research and teaching staff member at the level of a docent. If the custos has served as the supervisor or is biased for other reasons, he or she cannot participate in the grading of the doctoral thesis. If the custos has not acted as a supervisor, he or she can also be appointed to the task of faculty representative for the grading committee.
The faculty representative must be a professor or docent at the University of Helsinki or a member of the University's research and teaching staff at the level of a docent (the docent does not need to be in an employment relationship with the university). The faculty representative must be familiar with the University of Helsinki's doctoral defense practices and thesis grading principles. The custos may act as the faculty representative, provided they are not the supervisor of the work or otherwise disqualified.
A grading committee has already been appointed for the thesis at the same time when the preliminary examiners were appointed.
The Meilahti Doctoral Education Services send the pre-examiners' statements to the doctoral candidate before the Dean’s decision. The senior advisors present the Dean's decision. The Dean decides on the permission to defend on the basis of the recommending statements of the pre-examiners according to the schedule below.
The doctoral candidate must agree on a time for the public examination with the custos and the opponent.
Further information on publishing an electronic dissertation can be found on the page
At the Faculty of Medicine, as a rule, the grading committee consists of the opponent and the custos. If custos is also the supervisor, the custos will find a new faculty representative. Faculty representatives must be professors or docents of the University of Helsinki or members of the university's teaching and research staff with the academic qualifications of a docent. The faculty representative(s) must be well acquainted with the grading criteria and regulations related to the examination of doctoral theses in use at the University of Helsinki.
The grading committee proposes to the faculty council a grade for the dissertation. The proposal should assess the scientific value of the dissertation as well as the performance of the candidate during the public examination and therefore all the members have to attend the public examination. The proposal must also consider the preliminary examiners’ statements. The grading committee is requested to submit the proposal within 1 week of the examination. See the evaluation criteria of the Faculty and the grading instructions below.
The Opponent and the grading committee must submit their statements to the faculty’s doctoral study services
The statements must assess both the quality of the dissertation and the doctoral candidate’s success in defending it at the public examination, thus, the faculty representative is to be present at the public defense. The preliminary examiners’ statements will also be taken into consideration when assessing the dissertation.
Before the grading of the thesis, the doctoral candidate must be provided with the opportunity to object to the Opponent’s statement and other documents related to the grading.
The process of grading differs if the pre-examination has started before or after 1 August 2025.
The Faculty decides on approving and grading the thesis based on the Opponent’s statement and grading committee’s proposal. Doctoral theses are graded on a scale of Fail - Pass. When the Faculty decides on the grade it has to evaluate the theoretical background and the scientific significance of the research. Furthermore, the independence and originality of the topic as well as maturity of the author should be taken into account.
The grade Pass contains no significant deficiencies in the theoretical premise, methods or empirical section. The research conducted for the thesis must relate to a well‑founded complex of problems which has scientific importance. Moreover, the research must produce new, important knowledge for theory building in the field or for practical application. No serious deficiencies can be apparent in the phrasing of the research questions, the presentation of the theoretical background, the selection of material and methods, and the presentation of results and conclusions.
Grounds for rejecting the thesis (Fail) may include, e.g., the following: The research problem has been formulated vaguely or incompletely. The research materials are particularly brief or biased in terms of the nature of the problem and the objectives of the research. The methods used are not suited for examining the problem at hand, but yield erroneous or insufficient answers to the questions posed. There are serious shortcomings and inconsistencies in the structure and title of the work. In addition, the thesis may be rejected during the preliminary examination or grading process due to research ethical reasons (such as academic fraud).
If the doctoral candidate is dissatisfied with the grading of their doctoral thesis may appeal in writing to the Academic Appeals Board within 14 days of the receipt of the grading decision (section 64 of the Regulations on Degrees and the Protection of Students’ Rights at the University of Helsinki).
The Faculty decides on approving and grading the thesis based on the Opponent’s statement and grading committee’s proposal. Doctoral theses are graded on a scale of Fail - Pass - Pass with Distinction. When the Faculty decides on the grade it has to evaluate the theoretical background and the scientific significance of the research. Furthermore, the independence and originality of the topic as well as maturity of the author should be taken into account.
If a doctoral thesis is highly distinguished and ambitious in the light of all essential assessment criteria, it may receive the grade Pass with Distinction. The grading committee must be unanimous when it proposes “Pass with distinction”.
The grade Pass contains no significant deficiencies in the theoretical premise, methods or empirical section. The research conducted for the thesis must relate to a well‑founded complex of problems which has scientific importance. Moreover, the research must produce new, important knowledge for theory building in the field or for practical application. No serious deficiencies can be apparent in the phrasing of the research questions, the presentation of the theoretical background, the selection of material and methods, and the presentation of results and conclusions.
The grade Pass with Distinction is given for pioneering theses of exceptional quality. The research topic must be scientifically important, and the theoretical foundations, the methods used and the empirical section must meet the highest academic standards. In addition, the results must have considerable scientific importance, and the observations and conclusions must be novel and significantly promote theory formation or practical applications in the field. A thesis approved with the grade of Pass with Distinction shows commendable scholarly maturity and independence on the part of the author and demonstrates his or her originality and exceptional innovation as a producer of scientific knowledge. In addition, the doctoral candidate must defend the thesis successfully in the public examination. This grade is usually awarded to approximately 10-15% of all theses passed annually at the Faculty. If the grading committee proposes the grade of passed with distinction, all committee members must support it unanimously and outline solid grounds for the proposal.
Grounds for rejecting the thesis (Fail) may include, e.g., the following: The research problem has been formulated vaguely or incompletely. The research materials are particularly brief or biased in terms of the nature of the problem and the objectives of the research. The methods used are not suited for examining the problem at hand, but yield erroneous or insufficient answers to the questions posed. There are serious shortcomings and inconsistencies in the structure and title of the work. In addition, the thesis may be rejected during the preliminary examination or grading process due to research ethical reasons (such as academic fraud).
If the doctoral candidate is dissatisfied with the grading of their doctoral thesis may appeal in writing to the Academic Appeals Board within 14 days of the receipt of the grading decision (section 64 of the Regulations on Degrees and the Protection of Students’ Rights at the University of Helsinki).
Opponent's travelling
Travel reservations must be made through the Faculty's secretaries, so that in the event of cancellations, the university's travel insurance will cover the expenses incurred. The doctoral researcher, supervisor or opponent can contact the secretaries directly regarding travel bookings (
The supervisor's unit will cover the opponent's travel and accommodation expenses as follows (if the supervisor is not employed by the university, the expenses are covered by the custos' unit):
• Flight: Finland max €300, Europe max €750, non-European country max €1250 (economy class)
• Buses, taxis, etc.: According to the universities travel guidelines. Any taxi or bus trips will be paid afterwards to the opponent with a travel expense report with relevant receipts. Opponents will be provided with the travel expense form when they are sent instructions on the public defence.
• We recommend using public transport instead of a taxi whenever possible. The easiest way to buy a public transport ticket is with the HSL application, where you can also download receipts for the travel invoice.
• We recommend ordering taxis in Helsinki by phone, using an app or through the hotel reception. In this way, we make sure that the taxis are reliable service providers, whose prices are reasonable, and you also get a receipt for the trip. On the travel invoice, you are to write the routes taken by taxi.
• Should the opponent use their own car for the journey, the costs will be reimbursed according to the cheapest public means of transport for the corresponding journey, not with kilometre allowances. A print of the fares is to be included with the travel expense form.
• The Faculty will not cover any parking costs.
• Accommodation: max 2 nights in a hotel according to the university's travel guidelines/ (reasonably priced accommodation, no suites, no the most expensive hotels). If the Faculty’s secretaries are not used to book the hotel, we will reimburse a maximum of 150 euros per night against receipts.
The doctoral researcher’s supervisor pays the remaining travel and accommodation expenses of the opponent. If the supevisor does not have funds or is not employed by the university, the selection of the opponent and the covering of expenses must be agreed with the head of the unit in advance.
To be noted:
• Flights must be booked as soon as the date of the public defence is known or no later than one month before the public defence. Additional costs arising from flights booked too late will be paid from the funds of the supervisor or the research team.
• The opponent sends a travel invoice with attachments for other possible expenses (bus, taxi) to the address
DOCTOR RESEARCHER: University of Helsinki's contract hotels, travel guide and travel booking system can be found in
Dissertation hall and dissertation ceremony
The Faculty of Medicine pays the opponent's fee and the hall rent for the dissertation. If the dissertation meeting is organized in the premises of the University of Helsinki and the adjacent lobby or the Faculty Club of BM 1 is used for the coffee meeting, the 2-hour reservation will be placed in the same room reservation and the faculty will pay for it. If the coffee event is organized elsewhere, the faculty does not cover the space rent. Please note that HUS premises are not university premises and the faculty does not reimburse the rent of these.
In principle, the public defence is to be always organized in Helsinki at the premises of the university or HUS. If you want to organize the event in another location, you must agree with the faculty in advance. Independently managed arrangements can lead to the postponement of the public defence.
The doctoral researcher pays for the coffee service held after the dissertation conference. The faculty does not pay any catering costs related to the public defence ceremony.
The opponent's coat costs are not reimbursed from the unit's funds, incl. possible own project financing.
The university does not compensate the opponent's meals or pay any daily allowance in connection with the defence.
You can ask for reference information at
You can get more information about expense billing from Tuomas Hurri,
The procedures and formalities related to the public defence of doctoral dissertations have evolved in the course of several centuries. Today, faculties have different views as to the degree of formality of the public examination of dissertations. Some faculties observe old traditions, while others aim to create a seminar-like atmosphere with vivid discussion. The Custos appointed by the faculty acts as the official chair of the examination, so any details regarding the examination procedure should be agreed with him or her.