Skip to content

Checklist for reading/correction student thesis

1) General writing

Is every paragraph:

  • P1) Written with a single clear sub-argument?
  • P2) Is this spelled out, in a separate sentence, ideally the first or second (perhaps last or second to last)?
  • P3) Are all sentences clearly connected to this sub-argument?
  • P4) Is this connection clearly specified in the beginning of each sentence?
  • P5) Are all words used either
    • i) known or introduced earlier in the report.
    • ii) defined within the sentence.
    • iii) written so that it is clear that the reader is not expected to know it (e.g. "a concept called XXX)".
  • P6) Is the paragraph's sub-argument carrying the story forward, is it clear how it contributes to the bigger argument?
  • P7) Is each sentence complete, with comma before subject, no comma between subject and predicate, and without two complete sentences after each other without e.g. "and" in-between. Do you have comma before each additional sub-clause (mb = meningsbyggnadsfel)
  • P8) Do you write a, b, and c? (with comma before "and")
  • P9) All usages of words like "they", "these", etc is minimized and always followed by a clarifying word. (sf = syftningsfel, eller oklar syftning)


Is every figure and table done with:

  • F1) Large enough font-sizes that they can be read easily (as large as normal text)?
  • F2) A figure caption that explains all symbols used?
  • F3) A figure caption with a clear title that summarizes the point of the figure?
  • F4) A figure legend that shows the symbols and colors?
  • F5) Labels and units of both the x- and y-axis?
  • F6) Referred to in the text as Figure X or Table Y (capital letter)?
  • F7) A sense of carrying the story forward, especially in the Introduction and Results chapters?

2) Introduction chapter, chapter 1

Do you have the following content included:

  • I1) Some text before 1.1. that introduces the basic idea and setting of the report in layman's terms?
  • I2) A clear medical motivation? (usually 1.1)
  • I3) The necessary biological mechanisms, especially those that you study? (often 1.2)
  • I4) A good transition to why systems biology should be used, and introduction to systems biology in general? (often 1.3)
  • I5) An introduction to the specific methods (conceptually) and models that come before what you did, that you build or improve upon? (often 1.4)
  • I6) A clear and easy-to-find summary of the limitations of previous work, that defines the hole in the current body-of-knowledge that you want to fill? (e.g. at the end of 1.4)
  • I7) A short and succinct Aims section (not a new chapter, but e.g. 1.5)?
  • I8) Figures that carry the story, approx. one per sub-chapter?
  • I9) Clear transitions between each paragraph and sub-chapter?


Things to consider when reading all parts in the introduction:

  • I10) Are there things that are included but that are not needed to understand the rest of the thesis, or to understand the importance of the aims? They can and should probably be removed!

3) Aims

Overall, the most important questions when reflecting on a scientific report:

  • A1) Would the reader suggest an aims section that is quite similar to the one you wrote, if it wasn't included, just after reading the Introduction?
  • A2) Do the aims feel urgent?
  • A3) Do the aims feel like the next logical step?

4) Method:

Are you introducing:

  • M1) Your class of models/equations (usually ODEs)?
  • M2) All symbols explained before or immediately after each equation?
  • M3) Software used?
  • M4) Parameter optimization?
  • M5) Statistical tests used?
  • M6) Names of functions and methods clearly specified?

5) Results

  • R1) Are the results presented, but not discussed?
  • R2) Is the Result section concise, with good and informative headings?
  • R3) Are the figures referenced in a way that strengthens the context?
  • R4) Is there a logical flow in presenting the results, moving from one point to another seamlessly?
  • R5) Are figures and tables appropriately labelled and explained in the text, ensuring that the reader can understand them without constant reference?

6) Discussion

  • D1) Is a summary of the results given?
  • D2) Is the results commented on?
  • D3) Is the results put into contrast to existing literature?
  • D4) Are delimitations with their work introduced?
  • D5) Are future outlooks and potential continuations discussed?
  • D6) No new results are presented that should be in the Results section?
  • D6) Does the discussion tie back to the presented aims and answer the research question?

7) Conclusions

  • C1) Does the conclusion effectively summarize the main findings and their significance?
  • C2) Is there a clear restatement of the aims?
  • C3) The conclusion does not introduce any new information?
  • C4) Does the conclusion provide a concise answer to the research question or hypothesis?
  • C5) Is the conclusion written in a way that leaves a lasting impression on the reader?

8) References

  • Ref 1) In the text, sources are cited in the sentences they are relevant.
  • Ref 2) Sources are not cited at the end of a paragraph (for the whole paragraph).
  • Ref 3) Is the same reference style used throughout the report?
  • Ref 4) Is all needed bibliometric data provided in the Reference section?
  • Ref 5) Are all references cited in the text included in the reference section?
  • Ref 6) Have you included a diverse range of relevant and recent sources to support your arguments?
  • Ref 7) Is the reference list organized alphabetically and formatted according to the specified guidelines?