1 THE TAMIL NADU Dr. MGR MEDICAL UNIVERSITY, CHENNAI RESULT OF THE Ph.D.

SCREENING COMMITTEE - JULY 2013 SESSION

Sl. NAME OF THE ANDDIATE SPECIALITY No.

REMARKS OF THE SCREENING COMMITTEE

RESULT

01

Mrs. S. RENITA RUTH

MICROBIOLOGY

To modify the objectives to study newer ACCEPTED WITH diagnostic methods among Carbapenem RECOMMENDATIONS resistant Enterobacteriaceae. To recalculate sample size based on revised objectives. To expand literature review giving more significance to Indian literature. Title also needs to be modified in line with the suggested revisions. To revise study design and have a ACCEPTED WITH randomized controlled clinical trial with a RECOMMENDATIONS control arm (standard treatment) and an intervention arm (Triphala chooranam). To modify the objectives, sample size and methodology accordingly. To ensure the quality of the drug being used; To revise the patient information sheet to provide more details about the study.

02

Dr. M. KANNAN

SIDDHA

03

Ms. S. MAHASAMPATH GOWRI

BIOSTATISTICS

Novelty and innovativeness of the statistical ACCEPTED WITH methods used should be highlighted.. RECOMMENDATIONS Problem should be oriented towards the method rather than the database. Latent class & latent transit models can be explored further; 3rd objective should be modified and regression model should be described; What measure will be used to define clusters? Quality of Life - better to limit to one type of cancer preferably with one gender and QOL to compare stage wise and chemotherapy group wise; Multi intervention package details to be included and for acupressure investigator should be a certified trained person. Ethical committee obtained. clearance to be

Mrs. M. GEETHA 04

NURSING

ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

Inclusive age upper limit to be mentioned.

05

Mrs. P. NEELA

NURSING

Investigator herself is not clear about the NOT ACCEPTED study purpose and the Data Collection procedure; Not able to explain the information on video assisted instructions Investigator needs to undergo training for acupressure and reflexology to be qualified to implement the same. Gross mistakes in the proposal submitted. Ex. School is mentioned as setting. It is mentioned as 3 sections in the tool whereas it is mentioned only 2 sections in the proposal. Details of observational checklist is not available. Application of acupressure & reflexology is not given in detail. Ethical committee obtained. clearance to be

06

Mrs. ARZTA SOPHIA

NURSING

ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

Data collection procedure is not clear.

07

Mrs. C.R. MERLIN SUJA

NURSING

To obtain Ethical clearance from the setting Institution; Include the incidence of secondary MI statistics in Tamil Nadu and Hospital of Research; Elaborate the Exercise, Diet, etc and include Social habits - smoking, alcohol etc., Using check list without observing the performance not appropriate; Follow up in institution and at home not clear.

ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

08

Mrs. C.S. ANGELIN

NURSING

To obtain Ethical clearance from the setting Institution; Decide on control-II term babies; Obtain permission for the tools; Clearly state the Nursing intervention by Researcher & Mother.

ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

5 Selection of sample at school is not feasible- suitable settings may be chosen; Assessing low self-esteem & depression for this age group is not clear; Ethical committee clearance is mandatory from the setting Institution; Data collection procedure need to be modified.

09

Mrs. C. STARMINE

NURSING

ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

10

Mrs. C.D. THILAGAM

NURSING Setting can be changed as college which is ideal and feasible for this study; Written consent from individuals & parents is mandatory; Ethical clearance from the educational institutions authority is to be obtained; Exclude pharmacotherapy to find out the effectiveness of nonpharmacological intervention; Data collection procedure should be in detail; Tool details should be given in detail. ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

6 11 Mrs. N. MEENAKUMARI NURSING Age group should be specified according to the women age group. Administration of almond milk as one of the nursing intervention should be only on experimental group; To obtain TANSAC permission Area & data collection to be specified. Data collection produced. schedule to be ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

Consent of individuals only is not sufficient. It should be according to the marital status. Clarify CD4 would be assessed during the intervention phase in both Experimental & Control group which is not mentioned in the proposal whereas it is emphasized in the presentation. To obtain permission for the tools. Investigator is not sure about her role in the proposed study. Ex: Mentioned as self interventional preventive strategy but presented as self interventional module i.e. as lecture on selected items.

12

Mrs. M. KAVITHA

NURSING

NOT ACCEPTED

7 Not clear about over weight and obesity; Included drug as one of the preventive strategy. Not sure about this; No tool is available with the proposal; Mentioned setting in the proposal is community whereas presented as hospital; Inclusion criteria not clear post menopausal with obesity onset before menopause.

13

Mrs. C. JASMINE

NURSING

Age group not sure for the Investigator regarding children and adolescent Inclusion criteria is not specified in detail; Data collection not clear, mentioned as community in the proposal, these adolescent age group 13-18 will be at school; No tool description is available including the teaching proposal;

NOT ACCEPTED

8 No ethical clearance is produced; Data collection schedule not mentioned; Investigator has no experience working with HIV adolescent. in

14

Mrs. M. DARJILIN

NURSING Unable to explain the meaning of self enhancement & empowerment; No tools kept in the proposal. No ethical clearance is produced Unable to explain role play and social skill training. Parents involvement not included in the proposal; Data collection procedure not explained; Unable to explain the study.

NOT ACCEPTED

15

Mrs. S. SHENBAGAVALLI

NURSING Unable to techniques; explain the Nursing

NOT ACCEPTED

Selection of sample for the proposed study is not appropriate; Unable to explain the data collection procedures; Sampling technique and size estimation is wrongly presented and not clear for the Researcher. Not able to explain the specific role of investigator; Proposed study is not upto the level for Ph.D. Programme. PK work (Bioavailability) may be done Though the study may be of value, study is not properly planned. Co- guide: A clinical Psychologist and a Diabetologist need be there. The work will have to be logically organized with specific focus on methodology.

16

Mrs. J. BHARATHI

NURSING

NOT ACCEPTED

17

Mrs. A. HELEN SONIA

PHARMACY

ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS NOT ACCEPTED

18

Mr. K.C. ARUL PRAKASAM

PHARMACY

19

Mr. G. SEKAR

PHARMACY

ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

10 20 Mr. K. SELVARAJU PHARMACY Recommended to carryout pharmacokinetics studies on selected formulation. the the ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

21

Mr. A. DINESH RAJA

PHARMACY

Though the project hypothesis seems acceptable, the proposal needs to be addressed in detail. To increase Number of animals for acute toxicity To remove negative controls in animal group No justification for Rota Rod; Models not appropriate for learning impairment or AD. Choose appropriate ones.

NOT ACCEPTED

22

Mr. A. MADESWARAN

PHARMACY

ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

23

Mrs. P. JAGANNATH

PHARMACY

Change of title suggested May be rephrased as Role of synthesized flavonoids as Cardioprotective prophylactic agents using in silico, invitro and invivo models. Acute toxicity studies to include more animals

ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

11 In invivo studies To include atleast one more dose group; Relevant standards to be used in the invitro studies.

24

Ms. S.E. MAIDA ENGELS

PHARMACY

------ The plant has been extensively studied. Suggested to change the plant. The work needs to be more exhaustive and should have more depth.

ACCEPTED

25

Ms. C. SENTIL KUMARI

PHARMACY

ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

26

Ms. BABITA K. VAZAYIL

PHARMACY

------- LPS & Stress lacks consisting role in this experiment; One of them may be chosen; Research question and methodology needs greater refining. Analog based drug design can be included in the drug design

ACCEPTED

27

Ms. S. GOMATHI

PHARMACY

NOT ACCEPTED

28

Mr. S.S. RAJENDRAN

PHARMACY

ACCEPTED

12 29 Mr. V.M. ANNAPANDIAN PHARMACY The plant has already been worked on by Joshi. et. Al Suggested another plant with similar methodology Title lacks clarity; Work also lacks clarity; Methodology not clear. Isolated Compound to be Evaluated for all the activities. Include Cognostical work, as suggested by Title. ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

30

Ms. K. SONIA

PHARMACY

NOT ACCEPTED

31

Mr. VIJAY SHAMRAOJI BORKAR

PHARMACY

ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

32

Mr. S. DIVAKAR

PHARMACY

------ Adequate and relevant literature review suggested; Methodology needs to be clear and detailed; The work needs focus on one selected area.

ACCEPTED

33

Mr. B. EDWIN JOSE

PHARMACY

NOT ACCEPTED

34

Ms. M. DHANAMANI

PHARMACY

13 The work can be more specificEither standardization of plants and formulating a formulation from this Or Take some formulations which are marketed and then their standardisation may be done.

ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS

35

Ms. B. CHITRA

PHARMACY

---------

ACCEPTED

36

Ms. R.K. SANGEETHA

PHARMACY

--------

ACCEPTED

ACCEPTED

: CANDIDATES ARE INSTRUCTED TO SUBMIT THE JOINING REPORT THROUGH THE GUIDE WITHIN 10 WORKING DAYS FROM THE DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THIS RESULT.

ACCEPTED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS :

CANDIDATES ARE INSTRUCTED TO SUBMIT THE COMPLIANCE REPORT THROUGH THE GUIDE ON OR BEFORE 07.10.2013.

NOT ACCEPTED

: CANDIDATES ARE INSTRUCTED TO SUBMIT PROPOSALS (FOUR COPIES) THROUGH THE GUIDE WITHIN THREE MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THIS RESULT.

Sd./VICE CHANCELLOR

14