Phd in PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES

PhD Programme in Pharmaceutical Sciences – Sapienza University of Rome
Regulations for the Annual Evaluation of PhD Students’ Activities and for Admission to the Final Examination
(effective from the 42nd Cycle)
 

Art. 1 – Purpose and scope

These regulations set out the criteria and procedures for evaluating the training and research activities carried out by PhD students enrolled in the PhD Programme in Pharmaceutical Sciences, as well as the requirements for progression from one year to the next and for admission to the final PhD examination. In particular, the regulations define:

• the criteria for progression from Year 1 to Year 2 and from Year 2 to Year 3;

• the requirements for admission to the final PhD examination leading to the award of the title of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Pharmaceutical Sciences.

These provisions are drafted in accordance with the University Regulations and the general guidelines applicable to PhD programmes. This document integrates institutional directives and the internal rules of the PhD Programme, ensuring terminological consistency and formal rigor.

Art. 2 – Activities subject to evaluation

The annual evaluation of PhD students’ activities is structured into three main areas, for which specific performance indicators are defined:

A. Training Activities (TA)

This includes the teaching and additional training activities required by the PhD study plan. PhD students must complete at least 100 total hours of training over the three years, with an indicative distribution of 50 hours in Year 1, 30 in Year 2 and 20 in Year 3.

Training activities eligible for recognition include:

• University-level specialist courses (national or international) related to the PhD pathway;

• Scientific seminars, workshops or conferences (internal or external);

• Participation in internal disciplinary Journal Clubs or study groups;

• PhD Schools, advanced training courses or other forms of advanced scientific training;

• Scientific English course organized by the University;

• Training events and workshops promoted by Sapienza University of Rome;

• CIVIS courses*.

* CIVIS courses, offered within the European university alliance of which Sapienza is a partner, may be recognized as PhD training activities subject to approval by the Coordinator and submission of official documentation (certificates, attestations).

Verification: Training activities will be verified through attendance certificates or participation attestations issued by the organizing bodies (instructors, courses, specialization schools, or similar activities). These documents must be kept in the PhD student’s personal file and submitted to the Academic Board at the time of evaluation.

B. Research Activities and Scientific Output (RA)

These concern the progress of the PhD student’s assigned research project and the related scientific output. The evaluated activities include:

• Regular progress of the research project (monitored by the tutor and the Academic Board);

• Drafting and annual updating of the scientific report describing the research project;

• Participation in scientific congresses and conferences with oral or poster presentations;

• Publication of scientific articles in peer-reviewed journals, book chapters, and other scientific or editorial contributions.

Verification: The Academic Board carries out a qualitative evaluation of the PhD student’s progress on the basis of the annual scientific report and supporting evidence (projects, conference contributions, publications, etc.). Verification is normally conducted through review of the submitted documentation and the overall judgment of the Academic Board regarding the quality of the research.

C. External Activities and Knowledge/Technology Transfer

This includes professional development experiences and activities aimed at transferring knowledge beyond the strictly academic context. Activities considered include:

• Internships, traineeships or research stays at Italian or foreign institutions (lasting more than two weeks);

• Filing of patent applications or participation in innovation projects;

• Involvement in competitive research projects funded at national or international level;

• Teaching or teaching-support activities, such as tutoring, practical sessions and participation in the supervision of university theses;

• Collaborations with companies or third-mission initiatives, participation in scientific committees or corporate advisory boards.

Verification: These activities are verified through formal documentation (copies of internship certificates, agreements, project reports, statements signed by the tutor or host institution, patent certificates, etc.). Such documentation must be submitted at the time of evaluation as evidence of the activities carried out.

Art. 3 – Annual evaluation and progression requirements

Progression to subsequent years and admission to the final examination are granted only upon verification that the following requirements have been met:

Progression from Year 1 to Year 2

• Submission of an annual scientific report approved by the tutor;

• Completion of at least 50 hours of training activities (TA) approved by the Coordinator;

• Participation in the collective activities of the PhD Programme, such as Journal Club and other collegial meetings organized within the Programme.

Progression from Year 2 to Year 3

• Submission of an annual scientific report approved by the tutor;

• Completion of at least 30 hours of training activities (TA) approved by the Coordinator;

• Production of at least one scientific contribution, consisting of an oral presentation or poster at a PhD school or at a scientific conference of national or international relevance, or a publication in a journal indexed in international databases (Scopus or Web of Science);

• Participation in the collective activities of the PhD Programme, such as Journal Club and other collegial meetings organized within the Programme.

Admission to the final examination

• Completion of at least 20 hours of training activities (TA) during Year 3, as required by the overall training plan;

• Production of at least one oral presentation at a PhD school or at a scientific conference of national/international relevance, and at least two publications in journals indexed in Scopus or Web of Science (one published and the other possibly submitted), with at least one in which the PhD student is listed as first author or with the indication “equally contributed”;

• Submission of the final scientific report approved by the tutor;

• Participation in the collective activities of the PhD Programme, such as Journal Club and other collegial meetings organized within the Programme.

If these formal requirements are not fully met, admission to the final examination may be granted conditionally, upon a reasoned proposal by the tutor and subject to evaluation by the Academic Board. Such a derogation is allowed only on an exceptional basis, in compliance with the Programme’s rules.

Art. 4 – Derogations and exceptional cases

Reasoned requests for derogation from the above requirements may be considered, submitted by the tutor to the Academic Board, in the presence of specific circumstances such as:

• serious personal impediments or force majeure duly documented (e.g., health reasons, extraordinary family circumstances, etc.);

• research results of particularly high quality already achieved, such as to justify a positive evaluation despite non-compliance with one or more formal requirements.

For industrial PhD students, where confidentiality constraints or intellectual property rights prevent the presentation of scientific contributions, the Academic Board, upon a reasoned proposal by the tutor(s), may accept alternative evidence. In particular, statements signed by the tutors documenting the activities carried out may also be considered suitable.

Any derogation constitutes an exception and may be granted only through a formal resolution by the Academic Board following a thorough review of the case. The final decision rests with the Academic Board during the evaluation session.

Art. 5 – Evaluation procedure and communication of outcomes

The annual evaluation of PhD students’ research activities is carried out by a group of faculty members selected by the Academic Board. Typically, four representatives of the Academic Board are appointed to attend the PhD students’ presentations for the various years of the programme. Subsequently, during a dedicated meeting, the Academic Board reviews the representatives’ report together with the documentation produced by the PhD student and the tutor. In particular, the Board assesses the annual scientific report, training activity certificates, publications, participation in scientific events, and any other evidence useful to describe the progress of the PhD student’s research.

The evaluation carried out by the Academic Board has a deliberative/proposal-based nature and results, at the end of the assessment session, in a reasoned decision communicated to the PhD student and the tutor. This decision, drawn up in writing and signed by the PhD Programme Coordinator, may include:

• confirmation of progression to the next year or admission to the final examination;

• any recommendations or suggestions to further improve the training and research pathway;

• identification of any critical issues and indications of possible corrective actions to be undertaken in the following period.

The formal communication of the final decision is sent in writing (normally by e-mail) to both the PhD student and the academic tutor by the PhD Programme Coordinator.

 

Regulations for the Admission Examination to the PhD Programme in Pharmaceutical Sciences
(effective from the 42nd Cycle)

Structure of the Selection Process and Scoring

The selection procedure for admission to the PhD Programme in Pharmaceutical Sciences is divided into three stages, each with a maximum score and a specific weight in the overall score (100 points):

• Evaluation of Qualifications and Curriculum Vitae – max 30 points
  Assessment of academic qualifications, curriculum studiorum, and any scientific experience of the candidate.

• Evaluation of the Research Proposal – max 10 points
  Assessment of an original research proposal submitted by the candidate (in Italian or English), according to the requirements described below.

• Oral Examination – max 60 points
  Oral interview aimed at discussing the submitted research proposal and assessing the candidate’s knowledge, skills, motivation, and language proficiency.

The maximum overall score is 100 points (30 + 10 + 60). Candidates must pass each stage by achieving a predefined minimum score (see Minimum thresholds) in order to proceed to the next stage and to be deemed eligible for final admission.

Evaluation of Qualifications and Curriculum Vitae (max 30 points)

At this stage, the Selection Committee evaluates each candidate’s academic and scientific profile and awards up to 30 points based on the following main elements:

1) Master’s Degree final grade (or equivalent) – score based on 110 scale (max 25 points)

Points are assigned according to the candidate’s final degree grade (out of 110) as follows:

2) Weighted average of exams (for candidates not yet graduated) – based on 30 scale (max 25 points)

If the candidate has not yet obtained the Master’s degree by the call deadline, the Committee will consider the weighted average grade of the exams passed by that date, provided that the candidate obtains the degree by the deadline established in the call (e.g., by 31 October of the relevant year). Points are assigned as follows:

3) Master’s degree in progress: 3 points

4) Other academic and research qualifications

Additional relevant qualifications and activities may be assessed, such as: scientific publications (articles in indexed journals, book chapters, conference proceedings, and similar outputs), research experience (scholarships, research grants, project participation, study periods abroad, laboratory internships, etc.), and other post-graduate training or recognitions (Master programmes, advanced courses, further qualifying certifications). These elements contribute to the award of the remaining points (up to 2 points) to reach a maximum total of 30 points.

Threshold to proceed to the next stage: only candidates who obtain at least 18/30 in this stage will be admitted to the evaluation of the research proposal.

Evaluation of the Research Proposal (max 10 points)

Each candidate must submit, together with the application, an original Research Proposal in PDF format, written in Italian or English, with a length between 4,000 and 8,000 characters (including spaces; excluding bibliography and figures), and consistent with the PhD Programme research themes.

The Committee evaluates the proposal with particular attention to:

1. Clarity and completeness in defining research objectives, describing the methodological framework, and outlining the project timeline.

2. Relevance of the proposal to the educational aims of the PhD Programme in Pharmaceutical Sciences, with particular reference to the research themes of the relevant curricula.

3. Degree of innovation and potential contribution to advancing knowledge with respect to the state of the art in the reference field.

Up to 10 points are awarded for the research proposal. The submitted proposal is required for selection purposes only. If admitted, the actual research project carried out during the PhD may differ from the proposal submitted for the competition, as it will be defined by the PhD student together with the academic tutor and subsequently approved by the Academic Board.

This flexibility ensures that the candidate may adapt their research pathway to the needs of the Programme and to available scientific opportunities, without being strictly bound to the initial proposal.

Threshold to be admitted to the oral examination: only candidates who obtain at least 6/10 in the research proposal evaluation will be admitted to the oral interview. Candidates who do not reach this minimum threshold (or the one required for qualifications/CV) will be excluded from subsequent stages.

Oral Examination – Admission Interview (max 60 points)

The oral examination consists of an individual interview, either in person or via videoconference (where allowed and requested within the call’s terms), aimed at assessing the candidate’s preparation and aptitude for research in the scientific areas relevant to the PhD Programme.

The interview will focus primarily on discussion of the submitted research proposal, as well as an assessment of the candidate’s foundational theoretical knowledge and experimental skills in disciplines related to the Programme.

During the oral examination, the Committee will evaluate in particular:

• the candidate’s scientific preparation on topics related to the proposed research project and, more broadly, to the PhD Programme themes (including theoretical background and methodological/experimental aspects);

• the candidate’s ability to present and reason critically when illustrating the project and justifying methodological choices and objectives, assessing clarity, appropriate scientific language, and synthesis skills;

• the candidate’s motivation and aptitude for conducting research, also through discussion of their educational background (e.g., thesis work, previous experience);

• knowledge of English, assessed within the interview. The interview may be conducted, at the candidate’s choice, in Italian or English. If the candidate chooses Italian, English proficiency will still be assessed (e.g., through questions or a short conversation in English), according to methods established by the Committee.

The Committee assigns a maximum of 60 points for the oral examination. The oral examination is passed if the candidate achieves a minimum score of 30/60. Candidates scoring below this threshold will be considered insufficient and therefore not admitted to the PhD Programme.

Minimum score thresholds and final ranking

To proceed through the selection stages and to be admitted to the PhD Programme, candidates must obtain at least:

• Qualifications and CV evaluation: 18/30

• Research proposal evaluation: 6/10

• Oral examination: 30/60

Only candidates who meet all the above thresholds will be considered eligible. For final admission in the ranking, an eligible candidate must also achieve a minimum overall score of 54/100 (sum of qualifications + proposal + oral). At the end of the examinations, the Committee will draw up the final merit ranking based on each candidate’s total score (up to 100/100).

Publication of results and ranking

The results of each stage (scores for qualifications, proposal, and oral examination) and the final ranking will be published, in the manner and form established by the call, on the official website of the PhD Programme in Pharmaceutical Sciences. In particular, once all stages are completed, the final merit ranking will be made public on the Programme’s institutional website after verification of the competition documents by the competent bodies. Candidates may consult the official website to view the outcome of each stage and the final ranking.

All admitted candidates will be contacted according to the procedures set out in the call to formalize their enrolment within the deadlines established by University provisions. In the event of withdrawal or forfeiture by selected candidates, the final ranking will be used (sliding down the list) as provided by the University regulations governing PhD competitions.

Documents to be submitted

Curriculum studiorum

• Degree date and final grade (mandatory)

• List of exams passed for the Master’s degree and corresponding grades (mandatory for candidates not yet graduated at the call deadline)

• List of other academic and research qualifications: scientific publications, research experience, and other post-graduate training titles or recognitions

Research Proposal (mandatory)

Original PDF, written in Italian or English, 4,000–8,000 characters (including spaces; excluding bibliography and figures), consistent with the PhD Programme research themes.