Exploring Preferences in Selecting Dissertation Topics Among Ph.D. Students in Health Economics and Outcomes Research (HEOR) in the United States

OBJECTIVES: The main objective of this research project is to explore the preferences of Ph.D. students in Health Economics & Outcomes Research (HEOR) and related fields during the selection of dissertation topics. We focused on identifying commonly prioritized criteria, understanding shifts in importance over time, and examining the association between different perspectives and demographic characteristics.

METHODS: We identified 9 criteria pertinent to the selection of Ph.D. dissertation topics and ensured their comprehensibility through collaborative workshops involving Ph.D. students and faculty members from the University of Colorado Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research Ph.D. Program. A survey was then administered to current and former students in HEOR and related fields across the United States through the Qualtrics platform (N=40, Response Rate=8%). Participants were asked to rank and weigh the identified criteria, by allocating points based on perceived importance. Additional demographic and qualitative data were collected, capturing participants’ insights into changing perceptions and considerations throughout and after their Ph.D. research journey.

RESULTS: The survey participants prioritized criteria differently, reflecting diverse perspectives on what is important for selecting a dissertation topic. "Strong alignment with personal interests", "Substantially addresses real-world issues" and "Highly pertinent to current policy topics" were found to be the most important criteria for selecting a Ph.D. dissertation topic in HEOR, with respective weights of 19.2%, 16.8%, and 16.2% (out of total 100%). Despite "accessibility of funding sources" being rated as the least important criterion with a weight of 3.7%, several participants reflected on funding challenges and their impact on research focus. Finally, our qualitative findings highlighted the role of occupational backgrounds, academic disciplines, age, gender, and geographical location in shaping participants' perspectives.

CONCLUSIONS: Our results offer valuable insights for Ph.D. students and thesis supervisors in HEOR and related fields. Supervisors should recognize the critical role of the prioritized criteria and provide support, particularly in navigating funding challenges.