MODULE ICM 7010

DISSERTATION GUIDANCE
MSc AESTHETIC MEDICINE

2025-2026
Table of Contents

Module Description 3
Organisation of the Module 3
[Link] timeline 3
[Link] subtypes 3
[Link] ethics approval process 4
Dissertation Supervision 5
[Link] date and supervision allocation 5
[Link] of your dissertation supervisor 5
[Link] of the student 6
[Link] supervisors 6
[Link] meetings 6
Dissertation pathway 8
[Link] your topic 8
[Link] dissertation proposal 8
3. Structure of a scientific dissertation 10
[Link] page/front cover 10
[Link] page 10
[Link] of contents 11
[Link] 11
3.5. Introduction 11
3.6. Material and methods/Data collection 12
[Link] 13
[Link]/Critical appraisal 13
[Link] and future prospective 14
[Link] 14
[Link] 14
[Link] of Figures and Tables 14
[Link] of Abbreviations (optional) 15
[Link]/Supplements 15
Dissertation submission 15
[Link] 15
[Link] limit 15
[Link] and format 16
Dissertation marking 16
[Link] process 16
[Link] to students 20
Plagiarism 23
Appeals 25
Supporting documents 25

Page 1 of 24
Module Description

The dissertation forms an important part of the MSc Aesthetic Medicine programme, carrying a
weighting of 60 credits. The dissertation requires demonstration of the ability to carry out an
original investigation into an area of academic interest.

The main objectives of the dissertation are to:

• Conduct an independent investigation of a topic relevant to the content of the MSc
programme under the supervision of an academic member of staff.
• Formulate a research question, review pertinent literature, justify an appropriate
research design and perform data analysis.
• Communicate concepts and findings in academic language.
• Manage a project within deadlines.

Organisation of the Module

1. Dissertation timeline
Title deadline
Dissertation Topic Submission 7th November 2025
Supervision Allocation 5th December 2025
Dissertation proposal submission 9th January 2026
Submission deadline 1st August 2026

2. Dissertation subtypes

Students have the option to choose a variety of different project subtypes including:

• Systematic/evidence-based review.
• Clinical series/prospective clinical study (inclusive of a literature review).
• Service evaluation/audit (inclusive of a literature review)

There are certain rules to work by:

1. The Dissertation submission must be an individual piece of work in its entirety in full
compliance to the letter and the spirit of academic regulations.
2. Primary data collection, data processing, interpretation and analysis must be carried out
individually by each student. The supervisor should not be part of the primary project
execution; nevertheless they may assist with secondary revisions after the award has been
made and the student has graduated.

Page 2 of 24
3. The ethics approval process

All Queen Mary students conducting and leading on research* with human participants, their personal data
and/or human tissue outside the NHS REC** remit need to apply for ethics approval via Queen Mary Ethics
of Research Committee (QMERC). (for details see: [Link]
research/conducting-research-with-human-participants-outside-the-nhs/). You can also contact Dr Haidar
Hassan, Lead of student experience, who is a panel deputy chair of one of the six Research Ethics Review
Panels at QMUL for any queries relating to the need for such approval. For projects needing ethics approval,
please see below a step-by-step approach.

1-Start by registering your study on Medical Research Council for HRA approval: [Link]
[Link]/ethics/

Does your study need ethics approval or is it exempt?

[Link]
1.-Is-my-study-Research,-Audit,-Evaluation,-PPIE-(2).pdf

2-Follow the QMUL ethics application process by clicking on the link below:

[Link]
nhs/how-do-i-apply/

3-Complete the QM Ethics application [Link]

4--It is important to perform the statistical power analyses of the proposed study if applicable; the University
is not in a position to provide statistical support for individual student projects.

Please note that if a clinical study is performed outside the UK, an equivalent ethics application process
should be sought in line with relevant regulations and different processes may apply in addition to applying
via QM Ethics.

* Research is defined as any form of disciplined inquiry that aims to contribute to a body of knowledge or
theory (UKRI).

**If your study falls within the remit of NHS REC/HRA review please contact the JRMO webpages for more
information. [Link]

*** There are some activities involving human participants that do not require QMERC review and approval
because they are not classified as research, or because they do not fall within our scope, these are: audits,
service evaluations, public involvement and engagement, secondary data analysis on publicly available data
(excluding social media data).

Page 3 of 24
Dissertation Supervision

1. Start date and supervision allocation

Supervision allocations will be published during the 1st week of December and students will be
asked to contact their supervisor to arrange the first meeting. This should take place in advance
of your ethics application submission, where required, so that there is sufficient time to decide
upon research design and methodology.

The allocated supervisor will ideally have background expertise in your area of study. However,
this may not always be possible and regardless of the subject background of the supervisor, he/she
will be in a position to support through the dissertation process.

Please bear in mind that supervisors will facilitate and not lead the module hence the
responsibility for the quality and content of a dissertation is entirely that of the student.

2. Role of your dissertation supervisor

Students are guided through the dissertation by an academic supervisor. Supervision is an

important element in the process of compiling and submitting the dissertation.

The Supervisor advises on various aspects of the research project including:

1. The final title of the dissertation.
2. The feasibility of your proposed research and the possible risks that may be involved, for
example problems in accessing information, potential poor response rates to surveys etc.
3. Design and adequacy of methods.
4. Structure and style of reporting.

Supervisors cannot give an indication of the mark that might be expected, and are not expected
to read a draft chapter, help with formatting documents or proofread. The supervisor is expected
to give feedback on ideas and to make general comments on how the structure and logic of
arguments can be improved. Please note that reading drafts of the work before submission and
editing of content is not expected since this falls within the authorship category of duties.

Page 4 of 24
3. Responsibilities of the student

1. Initiate and maintain regular contact and inform the supervisor of ongoing progress.
Difficulties must be communicated at the time they are encountered.
2. Keep records of supervision meetings (see below).
3. Write the dissertation to a sufficient standard both in content and language using appropriate
academic terms and citation/referencing conventions.
4. Compose the dissertation and ensure it reflects the student’s own subject understanding and
research abilities.

Please note that you should not expect instant responses to e-mails; supervisors are asked to
aim to reply to any correspondence relating to dissertations (including email correspondence)
and to return comments on submitted work within seven working days of receipt.
Additionally, supervision cannot be guaranteed to be available at all times during the summer
vacation and you should ensure that you make adequate arrangements with your supervisor to
cover this period. The deadline for the last contact with your supervisor is 14 days prior to
dissertation submission deadline.

4. Changing supervisors

Once a student is allocated a supervisor, it is not normally possible to change this arrangement.
On rare occasions, however, a student may find that she/he cannot work with the allocated
member of staff. In the first instance, a discussion around the difficulties and an attempt to resolve
these through some agreed action plan should be undertaken. If, after this, it becomes evident
that the relationship is not sustainable, the student should contact the course director to discuss
an alternative arrangement. It is important to highlight any difficulties as soon as possible.

5. Supervision meetings
Supervision can take place through face-to-face/online meetings, email, telephone conversations
as long as both student and supervisor agree that the modality of communication is acceptable. A
supervisory meeting on at least two occasions during the period of the module is a reasonable
expectation. It is the student’s responsibility to take notes at supervisory meetings and the
“Record of Dissertation meeting form” needs to be used for this purpose.

Page 5 of 24
 Record of Dissertation Supervisory Meeting
MSc Aesthetic Medicine, QMUL
Student Name: ID Number:

Supervisor(s):

Date of Supervisory Meeting:

Meeting Number:

Brief Summary of Discussion (200 words max):

Agreed Actions:

Student signature:
Supervisor(s) Signature:

Below are a set of prompts to help you think about what to record

• Rationale of the meeting (initial contact, draft work, formal monitoring review).
• What was discussed (supervision arrangements, progression monitoring, training.
programme, draft work, research planning, funding application, conference or publishing
plans, progression schedule).
• What questions/issues/problems were raised with your supervisor.
• What have been your major achievements since your last meeting?
• What are the most interesting papers you have read since the last meeting and why have
they been helpful?
• What agreed actions or recommendations resulted from the discussion.
• What arrangements were made for further contacts/meetings.
Blizard Institute Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry Queen Mary University of London
Record of Dissertation Supervisory Meeting 2023/24

Page 6 of 24
Dissertation pathway

1. Choosing the topic

Students should identify a topic of interest in the aesthetic medicine field; a list of previously
chosen topics is available on QMPLUS under the dissertation tab.

Complete the Dissertation Topic Submission form by 7 November 2025 to submit your topic.

2. The dissertation proposal

Once a supervisor has been assigned to you by the team, the next step is to further refine your
project structure. The proposal is an important initial step in the whole process and aims to serve
as a road map to completing the dissertation.

A template of the dissertation proposal is available on QMPLUS; students will need to fill in the
form using a maximum count of 500 words.

Page 7 of 24
 Dissertation Proposal Form,
MSc Aesthetic Medicine, QMUL
-Student ID Number:
-Programme of Study:
-Dissertation Supervisor:
-Title of Dissertation: The title can be amended slightly as you progress through the dissertation, however, any
proposed major changes should be discussed and agreed upon with your supervisor and a new dissertation proposal
form may need to be submitted.
-Project specific details:
1. Aim and project Question
Project aim specifies WHAT needs to be studied, whereas project objectives divide project aim into several parts and address each part
separately; in other words, objectives comprise a number of steps that address HOW the project aim will be achieved.
2. Justification of Project Question
Project justification refers to the rationale i.e. the reason why the project is being conducted.
3. Project Design
This refers to the tools and procedures will you use (e.g. surveys, interviews, observations, experiments) to collect and analyse data
Why are these the best methods to answer your project questions?
Consider: Best BETs / CASP, Inclusion/exclusion criteria.

4. Ethical Issues
Systematic/Literature Reviews
No ethical approval is required as no active human/animal subject and no patient personal data involved.
Clinical Study considerations (QMUL ethical approval)
- Informed consent
- Beneficence/non maleficence
- Respect for anonymity and confidentiality
- Respect for privacy
5. Anticipated project problems
Systematic/evidence-based reviews
- lack of good quality and high level of evidence trials
- lack of standardisation
- level of bias
Clinical study: volunteers withdrawing from a study, issues with project material

6. Project Schedule
Use this section to show that you have a realistic plan for completion of the study/review.
You need to think about dividing the proposal into sections (not necessarily chapters at this stage) and giving an indication of how you plan
to project and write up each section.
7. Anticipated Project Outcome
You should conclude your proposal by addressing your predicted outcomes. What are you hoping to prove/disprove?
Indicate how you envisage your project will contribute to debates and discussions in your particular subject area.
8. Bibliography/References
This section refers to listing the books, articles and web pages you consulted to write your proposal. Make sure this is presented in a
standard and consistent format, namely the Vancouver referencing system.

Blizard Institute Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry Queen Mary University of London .Dissertation Proposal Form2023/24.

Page 8 of 24
3. Structure of a scientific dissertation

A dissertation should follow the structure as shown below:

1. Title page
2. Declaration page
3. Table of contents
4. Abstract
5. Introduction
6. Material and Methods/Data collection
7. Results
8. Discussion/Critical appraisal
9. Conclusion and future prospective
10. Acknowledgements
11. References
12. List of Figures and Tables
13. List of Abbreviations
14. Appendix/Supplements

3.1. Title page

This must include the following elements:

• Full name and student ID number
• Title of the dissertation
• Name of the programme
• Details of the department and university: Centre for Cell Biology & Cutaneous Research,
Blizard Institute, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen
Mary University of London
• Month and year of submission
• Word count

3.2. Declaration page

The declaration page should follow the front cover of your dissertation and relates to the
originality of the work. You must use the exact wording that is provided on the template below.
You are also expected to state the word count on this page as well.

Declaration
I hereby declare that this dissertation entitled “… ” represents my own work while studying for
the degree of Master of Science in Aesthetic Medicine at Queen Mary, University of London.
This thesis has not been previously submitted to any other institution. I can confirm that I
have read and complied with the academic regulations including those pertinent to
plagiarism.

Page 9 of 24
3.3. Table of contents

A comprehensive list of all the sections/subsections with their corresponding page numbers.

3.4. The abstract (suggested word count: 400-500 words)

The abstract, while it appears at the beginning of your work, should be written at the end of your
project. It is one of the most influential parts of your dissertation and should provide a synopsis of
your work and entice the reader into the rest of the dissertation.

Appropriate abstracts contain the following elements:

• Background
• Aim
• Materials and methods
• Results and main findings
• Conclusion and recommendations

3.5. Introduction (suggested word count: 3000 words)

Your dissertation introduction and conclusion should match and your ideas should tie together.
When writing a dissertation, it is likely that your ideas will evolve and morph as your work develops
so it is important to go back and edit or even totally re-write your introduction as your research
evolves.

Your introduction should include:

• Background information
• The focus of your study
• The value of the research
• Your specific research aims and objectives

Background
The main purpose of the background section is to ease the reader into a topic. The reader needs
to know why your research is worth undertaking. In this section identify crucial pieces of your topic
that the reader needs to know from the outset. You may also want to think about what key
terminology is paramount for the reader to understand the work. While you may have a glossary
of terms or list of abbreviations included in your dissertation, your background section offers some
opportunity for you to highlight some essential terms.

Focus
The research focus provides information on the rationale for the study and provides clarity on the
areas you are researching and the reasons why. Your research focus should link to the background
information.

Page 10 of 24
Value of your research
It is important to state that you have considered how your work will add value to the scientific
literature. The concept of adding value does not have to be a significant advancement in the
research in a field, but you do need to give some consideration to this element.

Aims and Objectives

Aims and objectives are different concepts. The aim represents a statement of intent i.e. what you
hope to achieve by the end of your project; on the other hand objectives represent specific
statements that define measurable outcomes i.e. the actions you will take to achieve the aim.
Putting them in the introduction is a matter of organisation and clarity.

Objectives should be S.M.A.R.T, as shown below:

Specific – be precise about what you are going to do

Measureable –aware when you have reached your goal
Achievable –a less ambitious but completed objective is better than an over-
ambitious one that you cannot achieve within a timeline
Realistic – ensure you have the necessary resources to achieve the objective
Time constrained – outline when each stage needs to be completed by according to a pre-
determined schedule allowing for unexpected delays.

Ask yourself the following questions when developing aims and objectives

• Is the rationale/justification for the research clearly explained?

• Is the research question(s) or problem clearly stated?
• Has appropriate literature been chosen for the review?
• Is there sufficient competence displayed in summarising the literature?
• Is the literature review broad/extensive enough?

3.6. Materials & methods / Data collection (suggested word count: 1500 words)

The aim of this chapter is to demonstrate that your methodology is appropriate enough to answer
the research question. It should include:

• Description of your study design

• The background/rationale for the design choice as well as inclusion and exclusion criteria.
• Evaluation of your choice of method and statement of its limitations

In scientific dissertations, emphasis should be given to rigour and reproducibility. The methods
should be robust. Where statistics are included there should be details of and justifications for the
statistical models used.

For this chapter you should ask yourself the following questions:

• Is there an adequate explanation of the research strategy/approach?

• Have appropriate methods been used to tackle the research question/problem?

Page 11 of 24
 • Has the choice of methods been justified?
• Is there a full explanation of how the methods were used?
• Is there an adequate explanation of the data collection process and choices made (e.g.
sampling, selection of data base, conceptual framework)?
• Is the process, as described, appropriate (i.e. without serious flaws)?
• Is there an explanation of any problems encountered and how these were overcome?
• Is there an awareness of any limitations in the approach taken?

When developing and presenting your methodology, think about how it allows you to answer your
questions but also think about how transferable it is to other related fields.

3.7. Results (suggested word count: 1500 words)

Writing up the results depends on the type of data you have generated, i.e. qualitative vs.
quantitative? Please note that QMUL does not offer statistical support for individual projects.

Start the section with a logical and organised introduction.

• Remind the reader what you set out to do.
• Use a brief description of how you intend approaching the write up of the results.
• Place the research in context.
• Let the reader know where they can find the research instrument (i.e. the appendix).

Organise the data with subheadings: It is paramount to organise elements into logical pieces that
guide the reader through the research.

3.8. Discussion/Critical appraisal (suggested word count: 3500 words)

The discussion section of the dissertation is the most influential part of the work and should cover:
1. How you answered the research question.
2. How you position yourself within the larger research field.

Questions to ask yourself:

• Has the data been analysed using appropriate techniques?
• Is there evidence of the competent use of specific techniques (at a level appropriate for an
MSc student)?
• Has the data been analysed sufficiently to meet the research objectives?
• Is there sufficient evidence of general analytical competence/insight at a level appropriate
for an MSc student?
• Is there an effective use of summaries/tables/diagrams or other appropriate data
presentation devices?
• Is there evidence of the ability to draw effective inferences or conclusions from the
analysis?
• Is the written discussion of the analysis and findings adequate?

Page 12 of 24
3.9. Conclusion and future prospective (suggested word count: 500 words)

Your conclusion needs to be well structured. If it is poorly structured or ill-disciplined it is likely to

give the marker a poor impression.

A conclusion can be broken down into three parts:

• Research objectives – a summary of your findings and the resulting conclusions
• Recommendations - these can be specific to the evidence of your study or can be in relation
to future research; others may be more generic i.e. need for larger sample size, difference
context, increased longitudinal timeframe etc.
• Contributions to knowledge in the field - this is an opportunity to give the reader advice on
what you believe should happen next in the particular field of study.

The conclusion section is the place to make your lasting impression on the reader and needs to be
comprehensive.

Ask yourself these questions:

• Are the implications of the results/findings discussed adequately?
• Is there an attempt to relate the results/findings to the literature reviewed?
• Are the results/findings used explicitly to answer the original question?
• Are limitations adequately discussed?
• Are areas for possible further study identified?

3.10. Acknowledgments

This is entirely optional and represents an opportunity to mention individuals you wish to
acknowledge. If you are thanking participants in your study this should be generic and should not
identify them. Please keep this as brief as possible.

3.11. References

We expect you to provide an accurate list of references that you have used for your dissertation
using the Vancouver referencing system and ensure that your reference list is complete, in other
words that every paper/source cited in the main body of the dissertation is listed at the end
([Link]
You will all be familiar with the referencing system because you have been using it throughout the
year. We expect you to be able to use it accurately and failure to do so will incur penalty marks.

3.12. List of figures and tables

Tables should be used primarily for numerical data but if applicable, both numerical and non-
numerical tables should use words sparingly i.e. they should not include passages of text more
appropriately included in the main text.

Page 13 of 24
3.13. List of abbreviations

This section can be very useful for readers’ reference while they progress through the dissertation
and marking process.

3.14. Appendix/Supplements

You may include any items in the appendices that provide supplementary information about
your research and which might be useful for the graders to see. However, all essential
information should be included in the main body of your dissertation. 'Raw data', such as a
summary of interview transcripts, survey or content analysis etc. should be included in an
appendix and are therefore excluded from the word count. If you are in doubt, then you should
consult your supervisor about what to include in the appendices. If you do not include data
relating to your research (for example interview transcripts, syntax and log files of Stata, SPSS,
Datastream or other software used) as an appendix; you should retain this for at least three
months after submission of your dissertation so that it can be presented to the markers for
reference if needed.

Dissertation Submission
1. Deadline

Students must submit their dissertations by 1st of August 2022. A late submission penalty may
be applicable; if the student has secured an extension due to extenuating circumstances (EC),
both markers will be informed of the revised deadline. Please be reminded that if you ask for
an extension, we cannot guarantee the dissertation will be marked on time for the usual Winter
Graduation ceremony.

2. Word limit

Please note that the limit is 10,000 words +/- 10 % (so the overall word count may be between
9,000 and 11,000) and you will be penalised for not complying with this requirement. As a
general rule, a 10% deduction in the overall mark will be applied for any deviation up to 10%
with regards to the word count (so 10% will be deducted for any work between 8,000-9,000
and 11,000-12,000).
The word limit for the dissertation includes all footnotes or endnotes but does not include the
declaration page, abstract, table of contents, Best Bets tables/Tables/figures/reference
list/appendixes/acknowledgments. In order to calculate word length, highlight all the text after
the ‘abstract page’ up to the start of the references and then do a word count.

Page 14 of 24
3. Presentation and format

A high standard of presentation is expected and the following guidelines need to be adhered to.

1. Primary order of Use the proposed structure, i.e. start with title page then the declaration
pages page etc.

2. Margins 2.5cm for top, bottom, left and right margins.

3. Font and size Arial 12 point.

Footnotes, section headings, chapter titles may be printed in fonts and

sizes different from those in the body of the dissertation.

4. Spacing Double spacing.

5. Alignment Justified.

6. Tables Tables can be formatted in whatever style and spacing you choose, but
ensure they are clearly presented.

7. Referencing Vancouver referencing system.

([Link]
130234)
8. Page numbers Ensure each page is consecutively numbered at the footnote.
Lower case Roman numerals for preliminary pages i.e title page,
abstract, acknowledgements, table of content, list of tables and figures
and Arabic numerals starting with page 1 for body of dissertation.

9. Electronic copies The accepted format is Microsoft Word.

Dissertation Marking

1. Marking process

Dissertations are double marked by two independent markers using the dissertation marking
guide shown below. This is an open marking system with the second marker able to see the
comments and marks made by the first.

Page 15 of 24
 Dissertation Marking Guide, MSc Aesthetic Medicine, QMUL
OVERALL
CONTENT 35%
FAIL <17.5 PASS 17.5 – 20.9 MERIT 21–24.49 DISTINCTION >24.5
No understanding of Good understanding of the issues Very good understanding Excellent understanding
the issues of issues and relevance of
Objectives clear but issues and relevance
No objectives not always relevant Clear objectives provided
presented and relevance indicated Objectives clearly stated
Arguments and opinions are and relevant
No arguments or opinions , or based on evidence but simplistic Arguments and opinions based on
poorly thought out and and not always thought out evidence, with good thought process The arguments, opinions
simplistic and progression of ideas and conclusions based on
Text is mainly descriptive with valid & reliable evidence
No evidence, discussion or some evidence, discussion or Concepts and theories &/or excellent
interpretation interpretation. considered in a critical manner with progression of ideas
good evaluation
No evidence of background Critical evaluation Shows originality of
reading may need more detail Evidence of appropriate background thought,
reading
Limited evidence of background Evidence of large amount
of relevant background
reading
PRINCIPLES OF
SAFE PRACTICE
35%
FAIL <17.5 PASS 17.5 – 20.9 MERIT 21 – 24.49 DISCTINCTION > 24.5
Implications for safe practice Implications for practice are Implications for practice evaluated Implications for practice
not considered in any depth considered using appropriate critically using fully evaluated critically
criteria but appropriate criteria using appropriate
Undiscriminating may need more detail criteria,
use of literature Literature reviewed
Literature reviewed but critical largely in a critical way Literature critically fully
One sided descriptive evaluation reviewed and perceptive
rendition of concept/ theory. may need more detail Very good analysis, synthesis, and appraisal of implications
No analysis or evaluation of evaluation of concepts and
concepts and arguments Sufficient analysis , synthesis and arguments. Comprehensive and
evaluation of concepts and appropriate analysis,
Implications not discussed arguments Good interpretation of implications synthesis and evaluation
drawn for safe practice of
Appropriate implications drawn concepts and arguments
for safe practice
Critical/ innovative
/excellent interpretation
of implications drawn for
safe practice

Page 16 of 24
GRAMMAR &
PRESENTATION
10%
FAIL <5 PASS 5 – 5.9 MERIT 6 – 6.9 DISTINCTION >7
Poor / unsatisfactory standard of Satisfactory standard of Good standard of Very high standard of
presentation presentation and writing presentation & Good presentation, immaculate
style writing style layout of academic writing
Numerous structure
mistakes in text , grammar, syntax,
spelling, punctuation and non- Some mistakes in text in Clear explanations and Fluent writing with effective
conformity to grammar, syntax, spelling, ordered presentation of use of grammar, punctuation
accepted rules punctuation and non- subject matter and paragraph construction,
conformity to
Unclear explanations and accepted rules Explanations always clear, and
presentation of subject matter ordered & presentation of
confusing & subject matter in an
lacking order Satisfactory presentation of ordered and logical manner,
subject matter but more
Length required Length requirements Length requirement observed
attention to detail is
not observed observed
needed
Excellent standard of
Incomplete/ inaccurate referencing, referencing
citations needed Referencing accurate

Length requirement
observed

Referencing mainly
accurate

SKILL IN
OVERALL
HANDLING 20%
FAIL < 10 PASS 10-11.9 MERIT 12 – 13.9 DISTINCTION >14
Weak treatment of subject Satisfactory treatment of Very good treatment of Excellent treatment of subject
subject subject
Poor overall Excellent overall impression
impression Good overall impression Very good overall
impression Excellent conceptual density
Low conceptual density Good conceptual density complex ideas intelligently
Very good conceptual handled
Poor originality of thought Some originality of thought density
Exceptional originality of ideas
Very good originality of and interpretation
thought presented

Blizard Institute Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry Queen Mary University of London. Dissertation Marking Guide 2021/22

Page 17 of 24
Once the dissertation is assessed by the first marker, he/she will send the completed feedback
sheet directly to the second, who will then add their marks and comments to the same sheet
and return it to the first marker. At this stage, it is important that guidelines are followed
pertinent to discrepancies as below:
• Where the difference between marks is 10% or lower, they split the difference, rounding
to the nearest whole number.
• Where the difference between marks is greater than ten percent and the markers do not
agree to split the difference, the assessment shall be marked for a third time with a review
of the marking trails of the first two markers. The third mark shall stand as the final one. In
the latter case, the third marker shall be an independent and experienced academic with
appropriate subject experience; either a Queen Mary member of staff or an external
examiner.

The following dissertation module awards are applicable on the basis of the final allocated mark:

Fail score: <50%

Pass score: 50-59.9%

Merit score: 60-69.9%

Distinction score: >70%

Students receiving a mark of less than 50% for the dissertation, are required to resubmit in the
following academic year; this will be considered as a second attempt and the mark will be capped
at 50%. Alternatively, the student can select to terminate their study at Queen Mary with the
award of a Postgraduate Diploma if they have accumulated enough credits to qualify for this. If
this option is chosen, there is no possibility of dissertation resubmission at a later date. A student
who fails a resubmitted dissertation, will be awarded a Postgraduate Diploma provided he/she
can fulfil relevant academic credit requirements.

Page 18 of 24
2. Feedback to students

Students are provided with a copy of their feedback sheet (template shown below) at the end of
the module. Faculty members need to provide clear evidence of having carefully reviewed the
dissertation and present constructive comments; to this effect, it has been agreed that every
marker will need to provide feedback of at least 250 words in length and with the following
suggested structure:

A-Abstract
B-Introduction/Aims and objectives
C-Materials and Methods / Data collection/ Literature search
D-Results and Findings
E- Discussion/ Criticalappraisal
F-Conclusion

For each of those categories markers are requested to highlight positive aspects as well as areas
for improvement with regards to future academic writing. Given that the marking process is
open, it is useful for the second marker to make complimentary comments focusing on slightly
different aspects of the work in order to maximise the benefit students enjoy from their
feedback.

This evidence trail is also vital for any student appeals, as well as for external examiners who are
required to comment on our double marking practices to the University. Faculty are requested
to use their allocated marker ID as opposed to their full name when completing feedback forms.

Page 19 of 24
 Dissertation Feedback Sheet 2021/22
MSc Aesthetic Medicine, QMUL

Programme MSc Aesthetic Medicine

Student ID

Student Name

Marks
1st 2nd
MARKING SCHEME (out of
Marker Marker
100)
Overall Content 35

Principles of Safe Practice 35

Grammar and Presentation 10

Skills and Overall Handling 20

FINAL AGREED MARK* To be entered by First Marker

Blizard Institute Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry Queen Mary University of London. Dissertation Feedback Sheet 2021/22.

Page 20 of 24
1st MARKER - (COMMENTS AND FEEDBACK)

(min word count 250 words)

Marker ID: Date:

2nd MARKER - (COMMENTS AND FEEDBACK)

(min word count 250 words)

Marker ID: Date:

3nd MARKER if applicable - (COMMENTS AND FEEDBACK)

(min word count 250 words)

Marker ID: Date:

Page 21 of 24
Blizard Institute Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry Queen Mary University of London Dissertation Feedback Sheet 2023/24.

Plagiarism
Safeguarding academic work against plagiarism is vital and students should refer to the ‘Course
Specific Info-Turnitin and Plagiarism’ tab for detailed guidance regarding their responsibilities
relevant to this aspect of academic practice. Furthermore, you are expected to have covered the
material pertinent to the use of AI in Academic practice (under Essential Info on the QMPLUS
platform) namely the Student Guide to Generative AI and the AI for Student Learning and Research
Course.

Before the work is sent for marking, the admin team will flag any work with a similarity score
>20% (excluding references) and will consult with Dr. Haidar Hassan, who will make initial
assessment for potential plagiarism. This is a step recently introduced to guard against
comments about potential plagiarism or mark deduction on the basis of absolute Turnitin scores.

In cases of suspected plagiarism, the admin team will make a formal referral to Blizard/QMUL
Assessment Offences panel. The work will still need to be graded according to QMUL policy, but
the internal mark is withheld until a decision is made by the panel. Feedback should be released,
so the student can improve their academic practice. The following statement must be added to
the feedback: “This assessment has been referred for investigation of a possible assessment
offence. The mark will be released following outcome of the review.”

A flowchart outlining the robust processes in place based on QMUL guidelines is shown below:

Page 22 of 24
 Lower than 20%

Turnitin similarity score Forwarded for

(excluding references) marking

Higher than 20%

To be reviewed by
nominated member of the
programme team

No true plagiarism detected e.g.

Reasonable grounds for
high Turnitin score due to use
plagiarism detected
common phrases/poor
referencing techniques

Work is marked and

Work is marked and final feedback is released
grade is released with without final grade; this
relevant feedback on how becomes available
the student can improve following outcome of
academic writing plagiarism investigation

If the assessment If the assessment weighting

weighting contributes 30% contributes 30% or less
or more towards module towards the module mark
mark or if it represents the and if it represents the
student´s second academic student´s first academic
offence offence

Referral to the QMUL Referral to the Blizard

Assessment Offences Panel Plagiarism Panel

Page 23 of 24
Appeals
Academic appeals are formal requests from students to review the decisions of examination
boards and shall only be done in accordance with the Appeal Policy. Students cannot appeal
against academic judgement, and it is important to note that assessments shall not be remarked.
The following also constitute invalid grounds and appeals founded exclusively on one or more of
these bases will be rejected automatically:

1. Appeals against the academic judgment of internal or external examiners;

2. Appeals based on the informal assessment of students’ work by members of academic
staff;
3. Retrospective reporting of extenuating circumstances that might reasonably have been
made known at the time;
4. Marginal failure to attain a higher class of degree;
5. Lack of awareness by the student of the relevant procedure or regulations;
6. Vexatious appeals.

Supporting Documents
The following documents can be downloaded from QMPLUS dissertation tab:

Dissertation proposal form

Record of Dissertation meeting form
Dissertation marking guide
Dissertation feedback sheet

Page 24 of 24