Supplementary rules pertaining to the Regulations for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor (PhD) at the Faculty of Medicine
These supplementary rules have been set out pursuant to the Regulations for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor (PhD) at the University of Oslo of 22 June 2010, and were adopted by the Board of the Faculty of Medicine on 21 December 2010. The revised rules were adopted by the Dean 29 May 2019.
§ 1 Applicability of regulations
The faculty has no supplementary rules to this section.
§ 2 Scope, content and objectives of the PhD education
The faculty has no supplementary rules to this section.
§ 3 Responsibility for the PhD education
§ 3 of the Regulations: Responsibility for the PhD education
The formalised research education at the Faculty of Medicine is organised in one single PhD programme that is not divided into fields of study. The PhD programme is linked to the research fields that are present in the Faculty of Medicine’s portfolio at any given time.
§ 4 Quality assurance
The faculty has no supplementary rules to this section.
§ 5 Admissions
§ 5.1 of the Regulations: Admission requirements
The Faculty of Medicine has laid down additional requirements for admission.
Educational requirements
The faculty can after an individual assessment, approve the following qualifications as a basis for admission:
- Education and qualification at master’s level
- Completion of a foreign degree (M.Sc. level) corresponding to at least 4 years in the Norwegian university system
Grade requirements
As a rule, the following shall apply:
- The average grade of a bachelor degree must be C or better
- Courses at master’s level must have an average grade B or better
- Master thesis must have grade B or better
- Five-year degrees must have average grade B or better
In cases where an applicant fails to meet the grade requirements or does not have a five-year-master’s degree, the academic environment to which the candidate will be affiliated must give an explanation as to why the candidate should be considered qualified for admission.
For degrees with few or no grades, an overall assessment will be made of the applicant’s competence and planned PhD project.
Documentation of English language skills
International students must document their English language skills by taking one of the following tests:
- TOEFL – Test of English as a Foreign Language with minimum score of 90 on the internet-Based Test (iBT)
- IELTS – International English Language Testing Service with band score 6.5
- PTE Academic – Pearson Test of English Academic with score 62
The following applicants are normally exempt from the above requirements:
- Applicants from EU/EEA member states and/or the Council of Europe/UNESCO-CEPES where English is taught as a second language over a period of minimum 7 years in primary and secondary school. Applicants must document their English language skills
- Applicants with a bachelor’s degree and/or master’s degree where English is the medium of instruction
- Applicants with an A-level exam in English
- Applicants from certain African countries, see NOKUT’s website for details (NOKUT – Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education)
In cases where the faculty is in doubt about an applicant's English language skills, he/she may be asked to document his/her language skills.
Requirement of residency at UiO
Candidates with external funding or an external workplace must reside at the Faculty of Medicine for at least 6 months of their PhD training. The residence duty can be divided into as many as 3 periods. The residence duty can be completed at OUS, AHUS and other cooperating institutions in Norway that have active research environments/research groups where the candidate can participate and of which the faculty approves. The research environment must have resources for the candidate to reside and must be able to provide research training in accordance with the faculty’s PhD regulations.
The academic requirements of supervision and the Medical Faculty’s aim for the candidate to contribute to the institution's academic development and environment must be met. Guidelines for receiving international PhD candidates have been prepared and must be followed.
The principal supervisor and internal supervisor must ensure that the residence duty is met. Description of the residence duty and the research environment where the candidate is to be affiliated must be included in the candidate’s project description.
Admission requirements
The faculty's standard application form and contract for admission must be used. Enclosed with the form must be a project description according to template and other necessary documentation. Which documents to enclose with the application form and contract for admission will be listed on the standard application form and the faculty website at all times.
For candidates on the Medical Student Research Programme
The faculty has prepared guidelines for admission of applicants to the Medical Student Research Programme. See the faculty website for more information.
Requirement for access to resources
The applicant must have at his/her disposal the resources necessary for completing the PhD project. The faculty determines what the necessary resources are. For applicants with external funding and/or workplace, agreement must be made with the individual research project.
Funding requirements
As a rule, the applicant shall upon admission document funding for the entire PhD training (3 years).
Minimum one year continuing funding (or two years with 50% continuing funding) earmarked the PhD education must be in place upon admission. A realistic and binding plan for funding of the remaining admission period must also be provided. As a rule, self-funding (salary to yourself, own company etc.) will not be approved.
§ 5.2 of the Regulations: Decisions regarding admission
Application for admission must be quality assured and recommended by the department/institute before it is completed by the faculty. The faculty makes the final admission decision.
Incomplete or inadequate applications will not be processed. An application will be considered as withdrawn if complete documentation is not presented within the deadline set by the faculty.
§ 5.3 of the Regulations: Admission period
Application for admission to the Faculty of Medicine’s PhD programme must be submitted to the faculty within two (2) months from commencement date in a doctoral research fellowship.
In cases where a research project leading to a PhD degree has started earlier than three (3) months prior to submission of application for admission to the PhD programme, an explanation of this must be enclosed with the application.
Extensions and maximum time on the programme:
Within the original admission period (3 years) the period of admission can be extended by statutory leaves of absence such as maternity leave, illness, etc.
When the original admission period is over, the candidate can apply only once for an extension of admission. The candidate must enclose a statement with the application as to why he/she is delayed, what steps have been made to avoid further delays and whether he/she has funding for the extension period. The statement must be enclosed with a revised plan for completion of the thesis. Application for extension must be made by using a standard form.
If the extension is granted, the admission period will be extended up to three (3) years. The faculty will determine the duration of the extension on the recommendation of the department/institute, which bases its decision on an overall assessment of the application. Further extension of an extension will not be given on grounds of statutory leaves, illnesses or part-time leaves.
When the candidate has been on the PhD programme for the original admission period + three (3) years, maximum time on the programme has normally been reached and all rights and obligations in accordance with the PhD contract will expire. This means that the candidate loses his/her right to study, but will still be able to apply to the faculty for permission to submit the thesis for evaluation for the PhD degree.
§ 6 The PhD agreement
§ 6 of the Regulations: The PhD agreement
The candidate is obliged to give a report on his/her progress (semester report) and to keep his/her contact information updated by registering in Studentweb every spring and autumn within set deadlines. Failure to submit the semester report and complete the semester registration in Studentweb may result in termination of the PhD agreement.
§ 7 Academic supervision
§ 7.1 of the Regulations: Content of the academic supervision
Supervisors are obliged to keep themselves informed of the regulations governing the PhD programme, and to assist their candidate in fulfilling his/her rights and obligations. Candidate and supervisor are obliged to keep each other informed of all matters relevant to the implementation of the PhD education.
The candidate has a duty to maintain an active dialogue with his/her supervisors on the work progress and to submit drafts of written works for discussion with the supervisors, and to share data.
The parties are obliged to follow up any circumstances that may lead to a risk of delay or failure to complete the PhD education, to ensure, as far as possible, that the education can be completed.
Note that the parties' rights and obligations are at all times described on the faculty website.
§ 7.2 of the Regulations: Appointment of academic supervisors
All candidates must have at least two supervisors throughout their time on the PhD programme. One of the supervisors must be employed by the faculty in minimum 20% position as a researcher or professor/associate professor. All supervisors must hold a doctoral degree or equivalent qualifications. The provisions on impartiality in the Public Administration Act Chapter II “Concerning disqualification” (Sections 6 - 10) apply to all appointed supervisors. Appointed supervisors cannot be directly related to each other (father, mother, daughter, son), or have other close relationships with each other or the candidate.
A candidate must have one principal supervisor and, as a rule, up to two co-supervisors. It is possible to submit a well-founded application to the faculty for an additional co-supervisor. A candidate cannot have more than three co-supervisors appointed at the same time.
On mutual agreement, the PhD candidate and supervisor can ask the faculty to appoint a new supervisor for the candidate.
If a supervisor becomes professor emeritus, retires or dies, the candidate and the remaining supervisory team are obliged to inform the faculty and to propose a new supervisor.
In the event of a conflict between candidate and supervisor, the parties shall together attempt to find a solution to the situation which has arisen. If the parties do not find a solution to the situation, one or both of the parties can ask to be released from the supervisor agreement. A request to be released from a supervisor agreement must be sent to the faculty along with an explanation.
A change of supervisor must be approved by the faculty. A supervisor cannot resign before a new supervisor has been appointed.
It is normally not possible to appoint a new supervisor or change the supervisory team if less than 6 months remain before planned submission of thesis.
The principal supervisor
The principal supervisor must be employed at a Norwegian institution. If the candidate wants an external principal supervisor, an explanation as to why must be enclosed with the application for admission. If the principal supervisor is external, there must be at least one internal co-supervisor.
In order to be a principal supervisor, the supervisor must normally be able to document supervisory experience from master level or specialist training. In a supervisory team, at least one supervisor must previously have completed supervision of a candidate until public defence.
The principal supervisor is responsible for implementing the candidate's mid-term evaluation, propose members for the evaluation committee and chair of the public defence. The principal supervisor, along with the internal co-supervisor if the principal supervisor is external, has the primary responsibility to follow up the rules and regulations regarding the candidate’s PhD education.
A supervisor can be appointed as principal supervisor for maximum 4 candidates at the same time.
Co-supervisors
If the principal supervisor is external, at least one co-supervisor must be employed by the Faculty of Medicine. When the principal supervisor is external, it is the internal co-supervisor's responsibility, in consultation with the external principal supervisor, to propose an evaluation committee and chair of the public defence. Co-supervisors have a joint responsibility along with the principal supervisor to follow up the rules and regulations regarding the candidate’s PhD education.
A supervisor can be appointed as co-supervisor for maximum 5 candidates at the same time.
Supervision
A supervisor can be appointed as supervisor for maximum 6 candidates at the same time (principal and co-supervisor together).
§ 8 The educational component
§ 8 of the Regulations: The educational component
The educational component must be relevant both to the thesis work and to a general research qualification in the subject area. The educational component at the faculty consists of a compulsory part of 10 credits and an elective part of 20 credits.
In its decision regarding admission, the department/institute and/or faculty may stipulate that the candidate shall include specific courses in his/her educational component even though the courses are not suggested by the candidate and/or supervisor. This applies when the department/institute or faculty finds that the candidate should take the courses because of his/her background, the theme of the project and/or method.
Elements of the educational component can be taken throughout the admission period, but as a rule, they should be completed within the first 3 semesters.
Candidates working on research projects involving animal testing must be trained in animal research that meets the requirements and skills given in the “Animal Welfare Act (LOV-2009-06-19-97)” and “Regulations on the use of animals in experimentation (FOR-2015-06-18-761)”.
Minimum 15 credits of the elective part must consist of PhD courses at a Norwegian or international educational institution. These courses must be ECTS-credited by the institutions that hold the courses. Course certificates must state that the courses are at PhD level. Courses must be documented with course certificates/transcript of records, content, programme and syllabuses.
A Norwegian specialisation is approved as a 5-credit PhD course. Courses included in a specialisation will not be approved.
Courses held at the Norwegian Medical Association will not be approved in the educational component.
Any courses that are not at PhD level must be pre-approved by the department/institute and faculty. Courses at master’s level can be approved, exceptionally, if the candidate has a particular need to acquire additional knowledge for an interdisciplinary task. A confirmation from the principal supervisor must in such cases state that the course is relevant to the research project. A course at master's level can be approved with fewer credits in the educational component than it was approved with at master's level. In order for a course at master's level to be included in an educational component, grade B or better in accordance to UiO’s grading system is required.
Courses at bachelor’s level cannot be included in the educational component.
Specialist courses taken at other faculties or institutions cannot be included in the educational component.
Maximum 5 credits can be taken as other activities than PhD courses according to the following rules:
- Research courses and workshops are approved in accordance with the ECTS grading scale. Minimum duration is 25 working hours. Programme and literature along with proof of participation must be documented. Maximum 3 credits.
- Participation in a national conference with a presentation (oral or poster presentation): 1 credit per conference. Maximum 3 credits can be achieved in this manner. The presentations must be on different individual subjects. Participation must be documented by abstract and conference programme. The candidate’s participation, title of presentation and time of conference must be documented.
- Participation in an international conference with a presentation (oral or poster presentation): 2 credits per conference. Maximum 4 credits can be achieved in this manner. The presentations must be on different individual subjects. Participation must be documented by abstract and conference programme. The candidate’s participation, title of presentation and time of conference must be documented.
- A popular scientific paper/chronicle written on the candidate’s subject area: 1 credit per paper, up to maximum 2 credits. Copy of paper(s) must be enclosed with application for approval of the educational component.
- Research period at an institution abroad: 1 credit per week. Minimum duration of stay is two weeks. The plan for the stay abroad must be approved by the principal supervisor and department/institute before departure and its completion must be confirmed by the external institution. A written report must be submitted to the department/institute on a standard form (docx) after the stay abroad. Credits will be given after the report has been submitted and approved. Approved report must be enclosed with application for approval of the educational component. Maximum 5 credits.
Candidates who have completed the Medical Student Research Programme normally get their educational component approved as equivalent to the PhD programme’s educational component if the research done on the Medical Student Research Programme leads to a PhD project. Former students on the Medical Student Research Programme may nevertheless be required to take new courses if this is academically justified according to the expected learning outcomes of the PhD programme and the project’s theme and/or method, or if it has been a long time since the educational component of the Medical Student Research Programme was completed before applying for admission to the PhD programme. Assessment of this is done by the faculty in connection with admission.
When the educational component is deemed completed in accordance with the faculty’s guidelines, and at the latest 6 months before planned submission of thesis, an application for approval of the educational component must be sent to the faculty on a standard form. The educational component is approved as a whole. Items will not be approved individually in order of completion; the only exception is applications concerning use of master’s level courses.
§ 9 Reporting
§ 9 of the Regulations: Reporting
During the admission period, the candidate and/or supervisors are required to do the following:
Semester reporting
Each semester in connection with the semester registration in Studentweb, the candidate is required to report on the previous semester's activities. See § 6 of the Supplementary rules.
Development dialogues
On starting up, after 6 months and subsequently every year for as long as the candidate has a valid admission agreement, the candidate and supervisor are obliged to carry out development dialogues in accordance with current guidelines.
Mid-term evaluation
When the candidate is 15-18 months into the PhD project, mid-term evaluation shall be carried out in accordance with the faculty’s guidelines.
§ 10 The Thesis
§ 10.1 of the Regulations: Thesis requirements
The thesis should consist of at least three (3) original scientific papers, of which at least one paper is published or finally accepted for publication in an international journal with peer review. All manuscripts and papers included in the thesis must have the same quality as a published paper.
The number of papers in a thesis will depend on the size and quality of each separate paper and on the extent of the candidate’s contribution. The number of papers may be reduced if the candidate has put an unusually large amount of work into a paper and the paper is of very high quality.
Up to two papers/articles can be joint works that are also part of another doctoral thesis. In such cases, the principal supervisor is required to enclose an account of the candidate’s independent contribution to each of the joint works.
The PhD candidate should, as a rule, be the first author of at least two papers. In cases where the candidate is not the first author, he/she must have made a substantial contribution to the data collection/-processing, the interpretation of results and the writing of papers.
In addition to individual papers, the thesis must contain an overall presentation of the scientific results with a thorough comparative discussion. This overall presentation must be an independent scientific document in which the candidate has an opportunity to elaborate and if necessary correct aspects of the papers. It must show a thorough grasp of scientific perspectives and maturity as well as the ability to investigate specialised scientific issues. The faculty has a guideline on how to write the overall presentation.
The faculty does not allow a thesis in its entirety to be a joint work by two doctoral candidates.
Unpublished monographs can also be approved as theses for the PhD degree. A monograph will be assessed according to the same criteria as an article-based thesis with an overall presentation. This means that the minimum standards of scientific quality are identical.
All parts of the thesis including the overall presentation must be written in the same language. Normally, the thesis must be written in English, but Norwegian may, after a well-founded application to the faculty, also be approved. It is not allowed to use other languages or a mixture of languages in a thesis.
For theses written in English, a summary in Norwegian must be included in the printed thesis. The summary must be up to 2 pages. Equally, theses written in Norwegian must include a summary in English.
§ 10.2 of the Regulations: Work not eligible for evaluation
A paper that has previously been submitted and/or evaluated as part of another person’s PhD thesis can be submitted for evaluation provided that a declaration is enclosed with the thesis where the contributions of the candidate and each co-author can be identified, cf. § 10.1, section 5. The co-author declarations must state whether a work is included in another doctoral thesis.
§ 11 Duty to report work results with potential for commercial exploitation
The faculty has no supplementary rules to this section.
§ 12 Submission
§ 12 of the Regulations: Submission
Address application for thesis evaluation to the faculty. The application cannot be submitted before the educational component has been completed and approved by the faculty.
Application for evaluation must be sent as a Zip file to postmottak@medisin.uio.no
In the Zip file, the following documents must be enclosed as separate PDF-files:
- The whole thesis
- Confirmation of approved educational component
- Signed co-author forms for each individual joint work
- Declaration of having obtained all necessary permits/approvals, including copies of permits/ approvals (both applications and decisions)
§ 13 Appointment of the evaluation committee
§ 13 of the Regulations: Appointment of the evaluation committee
In connection with application for thesis evaluation the internal principal supervisor, or if the principal supervisor is external in consultation with the internal co-supervisor, must propose members of the evaluation committee on a standard form. The proposal must be well founded and show how the committee as a whole covers the subject field of the thesis.
In addition, two persons must be proposed who have expressed willingness to act as chair of the public defence.
The form must be signed by the principal supervisor, or if the principal supervisor is external in consultation with the internal co-supervisor, and submitted to the faculty and the candidate. The candidate has an opportunity to comment on the proposal within one week after the faculty received the proposal. Signed declarations of impartiality for the proposed committee members must be enclosed. Co-author(s) and/or former and current supervisor(s) of the candidate cannot sit on the committee.
As a rule, 3 members shall sit on the committee and consist of:
- A member from an institution abroad
- A member from another institution than UiO
- A member from UiO (committee chair)
The committee chair must as a rule be employed (as associate professor or professor) at the Faculty of Medicine, UiO.
The committee members shall normally not have had any joint works with the candidate’s supervisors during the last 5 years. If a supervisor and a committee member have had a collaboration, clarification of this must be given.
If a committee member withdraws before the recommendation is submitted, a new committee member must be appointed as suggested by the principal supervisor. The proposal and declaration of impartiality must be sent to the faculty.
If a member of the committee is unable to be present at the trial lecture and/or public defence of the thesis, the faculty can appoint a substitute member as suggested by the committee chair or the principal supervisor.
If more than one member of the committee withdraws before the evaluation has been finalized, a new committee must be appointed before the evaluation can start again. The thesis is sent to the new committee in the form it was at the time the original evaluation was stopped.
The PhD examination must be postponed if more than one member of the committee cannot be present at the trial lecture and/or public defence.
§ 14 The work of the evaluation committee
§ 14.2 of the Regulations: Revision of a submitted thesis
If the evaluation committee finds that a thesis cannot be revised within three (3) months to a level worthy of a PhD degree, the thesis must be rejected.
The evaluation committee must deliver its final recommendation within one (1) month after a revised thesis has been submitted to the committee. If the candidate has made the changes suggested by the committee, the committee shall normally recommend that the candidate be given the opportunity to defend his/her thesis.
§ 14.3 of the Regulations: Recommendation of the evaluation committee
The recommendation must be a joint statement. Individual statements can be enclosed, when relevant, and shall be presented in the same language as the thesis. A standard form with guidelines has been made for this purpose.
The committee’s final recommendation must be given no later than 3 months after the committee received the thesis.
The PhD candidate’s written comments to the recommendation will be enclosed with the recommendation when the faculty makes its decision.
§ 14.4 of the Regulations: Correction of formal errors in the thesis
Application to correct formal errors in the thesis must be sent to the faculty using a standard form. The application is handled by the evaluation committee. Where there is doubt, the Dean will decide.
Formal errors are regarded as mistakes of a non-academic nature such as spelling mistakes, poor language and the like. A more detailed description of formal errors is provided on the faculty website. An overview of the errors must be printed in the final version of the thesis. Changing the status of a journal after submission is not allowed.
§ 15 The faculty’s procedures relating to the evaluation committee’s recommendation
The faculty has no supplementary rules to this section.
§ 16 Re-submission
§ 16 of the Regulations: Re-submission
Re-submission of a thesis may take place at the earliest six (6) months and at the latest two (2) years after the faculty decided to reject the thesis.
As far as possible, the faculty appoints the same evaluation committee to evaluate the revised thesis unless there are special grounds for appointing new committee members.
§ 17 Publicising the thesis
§ 17.1 of the Regulations: Faculty requirements for the printed thesis
When the faculty has found the thesis worthy of public defence, 60 compulsory copies of the thesis will be printed and the expenses will be covered by the department/institute. The faculty will ensure that copies of the thesis are available during the public defence, and that the legal deposit is met according to law.
The candidate is obliged to use the print centre that the faculty uses at any given time. The faculty has prepared its own routines and standard forms, which must be used in the printing process. The thesis must have the university's standard format and the faculty's cover and unique ISBN serial number.
§ 17.2 of the Regulations: Publicising
In connection with publicising the PhD thesis, the candidate must no later than 3 weeks prior to the public defence submit various documents to the faculty. These documents are listed on the faculty website. The defence of the thesis is open to the public, and the thesis must be made publicly available.
§ 18 The PhD examination
§ 18.1 of the Regulations: Trial lecture
The trial lecture is held prior to the public defence and can take place at the earliest six weeks after the faculty has decided that the thesis is worthy of defence.
The PhD candidate must deliver a trial lecture on a given topic. The trial lecture shall as a rule be delivered in the same language as the thesis, normally English. The trial lecture can be held in Norwegian if the candidate and committee members all master the Scandinavian languages and the committee itself makes a request regarding this matter.
The given topic shall not allow the candidate to refer to his/her own PhD work and shall not aim to cover any weak points in the thesis. The topic shall not be presented as a question. The purpose of the trial lecture is for the candidate to show his/her ability to disseminate research-based knowledge. In addition, the candidate shall show an ability to present the lecture topic within the available time frame, master presentation techniques and any audiovisual aids, handle questions and comments from the audience and show an ability to disseminate.
The trial lecture must be delivered in a way that students, persons without specialist knowledge and the informed public will benefit from the lecture. The trial lecture shall last 45 minutes, with an additional 15 minutes for any questions/comments. The evaluation committee evaluates the trial lecture by using a standard form.
Use of Skype and the like during trial lecture is only permitted in case of force majeure and must be preapproved by the faculty.
§ 18.2 of the Regulations: Public defence of the thesis (disputation)
The public defence shall be held in premises belonging to the University of Oslo or in premises the faculty has approved of at Oslo University Hospital and Akershus University Hospital.
The public defence must be held in the same language as that of the thesis.
After a short introduction by the chair of the public defence, and before the arguments from the opposition, the PhD candidate must give an account of his/her research work for up to 20 minutes. The candidate's account must be given in a way that students, persons without specialist knowledge and the informed public will benefit from it. The evaluation committee proposes, in advance, who of its members are to have the roles of first and second opponent respectively.
The faculty has prepared guidelines for the implementation of the public defence. The guidelines can be found on the faculty website.
The chair of the public defence is the Dean's proxy and shall normally be employed as professor or associate professor at the Faculty of Medicine. He/she must come from a different research group or research environment to that of the candidate and supervisors. The chair of the public defence can also be emeritus.
The chair of the public defence cannot be co-author of any of the candidate’s scientific papers; this includes papers that do not form part of the PhD work. Neither shall the chair normally have any joint works with the candidate’s supervisors during the last five (5) years.
If the public defence of the thesis is not approved, the faculty must be notified immediately.
Use of Skype and the like during public defence of the thesis is only permitted in case of force majeure and must be preapproved by the faculty.
§ 19 Approval of the doctoral examination
The faculty has no supplementary rules to this section.
§ 20 Conferral of the degree and diploma
The faculty has no supplementary rules to this section.
§ 21 Diploma supplement
The faculty has no supplementary rules to this section.
§ 22 Appeals
§ 22 of the Regulations: Appeals
Settlements of complaints pursuant to section 28 of the Public Administration Act (Forvaltningsloven):
Detailed grounds for an appeal must be sent to the faculty. The faculty may annul or amend a decision if it finds that the appeal is justified. If the faculty dismisses the appeal, the appeal will be forwarded to the Central Appeals Committee at UiO (UiOs nemnd for studentsaker) for a ruling. The Central Appeals Committee can investigate all aspects of the appealed decision. Should the faculty or the Central Appeals Committee dealing with the appeal find grounds to do so, it may appoint individuals or a committee to undertake an evaluation of the assessment made and the criteria underlying it, or to undertake a new or supplementary expert assessment. The Central Appeals Committee's decision regarding complaints cannot be appealed.
Settlements of complaints pursuant to section 5 paragraph 2 of the Act on ethics and integrity in research (Forskningsetikkloven):
Individual cases regarding research ethics shall according to UiO’s guidelines first be handled by the faculty. Serious cases shall be put forward either to UiO’s Research Ethics Committee (UiOs Forskningsetiske utvalg) or the Commission on Research Conduct (Redelighetsutvalg) at the Faculty of Medicine/Oslo University Hospital. The case can be appealed further to the National Commission for the Investigation of Research Misconduct (Granskingsutvalget). The National Commission for the Investigation of Research Misconduct’s decision is final and cannot be appealed.
§ 23 Entry into force and transitional rules
§ 23 of the Regulations: Entry into force and transitional rules
The supplementary rules pertaining to the Regulations for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor (Ph.D.) at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, come into force with immediate effect on their adoption by the Dean.