MD · Pharmacology

Pharmacology thesis topics, with the design and feasibility for each

A pharmacology thesis in a medical college is usually clinical in its data even though the department is non-clinical: prescriptions collected from an outpatient department, adverse drug reactions captured through a pharmacovigilance centre, drug utilisation expressed in World Health Organization indicators or defined daily doses, and medicine cost or availability audited against the national essential medicines list. The recurring constraint is not equipment but access — you need a clinical department to let you stand in its clinic or read its case sheets, and that permission has to be secured in writing before the synopsis. Examiners press on whether your indicators were calculated exactly as defined, on who assigned causality and by which scale, and on how a prescription was sampled rather than simply collected.

Topic register · 43 entries · 8 designs^[6]

Read the register Pharmacology thesis help

NMC PGMER-2023
NBEMS 180 days / 26 months
UGC 2018 · under 10%
ICMR 2017 · ethics

The register

Filter, read, copy

The Pharmacology register

Authored by the practice · Not compiled from any list

Filter by design or by feasibility, or search the titles and outcomes. Filtering only hides entries: every topic stays on the page, so nothing is lost if you clear the filters or arrive by a deep link.

Search title and outcome

Study design

Feasibility in a teaching unit

Any43Straightforward24Moderate17Demanding2

Showing 43 of 43 topics

The sample figure on each plate is a planning range read off the design, not a calculated answer. Your own number comes from a calculation against your own assumptions — the difference you would call clinically meaningful, the variability in your setting, the power you want — and it belongs in the synopsis with those assumptions written beside it.

Topic 01 / 43
Link to this entry
Prescribing pattern in the general outpatient department of a teaching hospital assessed by World Health Organization core prescribing indicators
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Average number of drugs per encounter, with the proportion prescribed by generic name, as an antibiotic, as an injection and from the essential medicines list
Collection time
6 to 8 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 600 to 1000 prescriptions, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Written permission from the clinical department to collect prescriptions at the pharmacy counter or clinic exit
- The current national and institutional essential medicines lists
- A data entry format that records every drug as written, including strength and duration
What derails it
The indicators are defined for a prescribing encounter, so a sample taken only at the hospital pharmacy counter misses everything prescribed and bought outside, and the generic-name proportion depends on whether the hospital mandates generic writing; state the sampling point and any such policy, because without it the figures are not comparable with anything.
Topic 02 / 43
Link to this entry
Audit of prescriptions in a paediatric outpatient department against rational prescribing criteria
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Proportion of prescriptions complete on legibility, dose, formulation and duration criteria defined a priori
Collection time
6 to 8 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 500 to 800 prescriptions, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Paediatric department permission and a collection slot in the clinic
- A paediatric dose reference against which weight-based doses are checked
- A weight recorded on the prescription, without which dose appropriateness cannot be judged
What derails it
A paediatric prescription cannot be audited for dose if the child's weight is not written on it, and in a crowded clinic the weight is frequently missing; pilot one week of collection to see what proportion of prescriptions are auditable at all, because that proportion decides whether the study is viable.
Topic 03 / 43
Link to this entry
Drug utilisation in a general medicine ward expressed in defined daily doses per hundred bed-days
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Defined daily doses per hundred bed-days for each therapeutic class, with the drug utilisation ninety per cent segment identified
Collection time
8 to 10 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 400 to 700 admissions, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Access to treatment charts for admitted patients, not just discharge summaries
- The current anatomical therapeutic chemical classification and defined daily dose values
- A reliable bed-day denominator from the ward census or medical records
What derails it
Defined daily doses assume an adult maintenance dose for the main indication and they distort badly for drugs used at renal-adjusted or paediatric doses, so decide in the protocol how such prescriptions are handled and state it, rather than letting a renal ward quietly deflate your figures.
Topic 04 / 43
Link to this entry
Antimicrobial use in inpatients classified by the World Health Organization access, watch and reserve categories
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Proportion of antimicrobial prescriptions in each access, watch and reserve category
Collection time
8 to 10 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 400 to 700 antimicrobial prescriptions, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Permission from at least two clinical departments so that the sample is not single-unit
- The current classification list and a written rule for combinations and fixed dose products
- A case sheet review arrangement, since indication must be recorded alongside the drug
What derails it
Fixed dose antibiotic combinations and surgical prophylaxis sit awkwardly in this classification and how you categorise them changes the headline proportion; write the categorisation rules into the protocol and have a second person code a sample independently, because the classification decision is where this study gets challenged.
Topic 05 / 43
Link to this entry
Appropriateness of surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis in elective operations against institutional policy
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Proportion of cases in which the agent, timing and duration of prophylaxis all conformed to the stated policy
Collection time
8 to 10 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 300 to 500 elective operations, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A written institutional or national prophylaxis policy to audit against
- Operation theatre and anaesthesia records that timestamp the pre-operative dose
- Surgical department permission and an agreement that the audit is not punitive
What derails it
Timing is the indicator that fails: the pre-operative dose is often given on the ward with no time recorded, or written as given in theatre without a clock time, so confirm from a week of records that administration times exist before you make timing your primary outcome.
Topic 06 / 43
Link to this entry
Adverse drug reactions in a medicine ward detected by intensive monitoring, with causality, severity and preventability assessment
DesignProspective observationalFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Number of adverse drug reactions per hundred admissions, with causality category on a standard scale
Collection time
10 to 12 months of daily ward rounds
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 400 to 700 admissions monitored, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Daily access to the ward round or the case sheets, not a weekly visit
- Standard causality, severity and preventability scales and training in applying them
- A clinician who will discuss suspected reactions and countersign the assessment
What derails it
Intensive monitoring means being on the ward every working day for the whole period, and a single month of absence for examinations or duty leaves a hole that cannot be filled retrospectively; plan the collection calendar around your own posting schedule before committing to the denominator.
Topic 07 / 43
Link to this entry
Adverse drug reactions to anti-tubercular therapy among patients on treatment at a programme treatment centre
DesignProspective observationalFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Proportion of patients experiencing at least one adverse reaction, by organ system and causality category
Collection time
12 to 15 months of enrolment and follow-up
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 200 to 350 patients, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Collaboration with the chest medicine department or the district programme unit
- Baseline and follow-up liver function testing available through the hospital laboratory
- A follow-up schedule that matches the patient's own drug collection visits
What derails it
Patients attend for drugs, not for your study, and the ones who develop a reaction frequently stop coming or go to a private doctor instead, so the reactions you capture are biased towards the mild; arrange with the treatment supporter to be informed of interruptions and record what happened to every patient who stops attending.
Topic 08 / 43
Link to this entry
Pattern of adverse drug reactions to first-line antiretroviral therapy at an antiretroviral therapy centre
DesignProspective observationalFeasibilityDemanding
Primary outcome
Proportion developing a documented adverse reaction, with the proportion leading to a regimen change
Collection time
12 to 15 months of enrolment and follow-up
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 150 to 250 patients, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Formal permission from the state programme and the centre in-charge
- A confidentiality protocol that satisfies the programme's own requirements
- Laboratory access for the monitoring tests the regimen requires
What derails it
Access here is governed by programme rules on confidentiality, not only by your ethics committee, and approval can take months and may restrict what identifiers you may record at all; secure that written clearance before your protocol is finalised rather than assuming hospital approval covers it.
Topic 09 / 43
Link to this entry
Adverse drug reactions during cancer chemotherapy in a day-care oncology unit, graded by a standard toxicity criteria scale
DesignProspective observationalFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Proportion of cycles complicated by an adverse reaction of grade two or above on the stated criteria
Collection time
12 months of enrolment
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 150 to 250 patients followed over stated cycles, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Medical oncology collaboration and access to the chemotherapy day-care unit
- The current toxicity grading criteria and training in using them
- Haematology and biochemistry results available for each cycle
What derails it
Toxicity is graded from symptoms recorded between cycles and patients normalise nausea and fatigue until asked directly, so build a structured symptom checklist administered at each visit rather than relying on what the case sheet notes.
Topic 10 / 43
Link to this entry
Knowledge, attitude and practice of adverse drug reaction reporting among resident doctors and nurses in a teaching hospital
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Knowledge and attitude scores on a pre-tested questionnaire, with the proportion who have ever submitted a report
Collection time
4 to 6 months of data collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 250 to 400 respondents, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Institutional permission and departmental heads' agreement to circulate the questionnaire
- A pre-tested instrument with validity and reliability checks documented
- A distribution plan that reaches night-shift and posted-out staff
What derails it
Questionnaires handed out during a departmental meeting return with the opinions of those who attend meetings, and a self-administered form distributed by a superior produces flattering answers; record the response rate honestly and describe how forms were returned, because this is the first thing examiners question in a knowledge study.
Topic 11 / 43
Link to this entry
Effect of a structured sensitisation programme on adverse drug reaction reporting by resident doctors
DesignComparative interventionalFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Number of reports submitted to the pharmacovigilance centre in the period after the intervention compared with the period before
Collection time
12 months covering both periods
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 100 to 200 residents, with reports counted over equal periods before and after, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A functioning pharmacovigilance centre with a dated record of reports received
- Teaching material and permission to run sessions across departments
- A defined and equal observation window before and after the intervention
What derails it
A rise in reports may reflect nothing more than the study having reminded people that a pharmacovigilance centre exists, and such attention need not last, so set the post-intervention window far enough out to mean something and say explicitly that you cannot separate the session from the attention it drew.
Topic 12 / 43
Link to this entry
Agreement between two standard causality assessment scales applied to reported adverse drug reactions
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Agreement between the two scales in assigning causality category, quantified by a weighted agreement statistic
Collection time
6 to 8 months using reports already held plus prospective ones
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 150 to 250 reports, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Access to the pharmacovigilance centre archive of completed reports
- Two independent assessors trained on both scales, working blind to each other
- A written rule for resolving disagreement, decided before assessment begins
What derails it
Both scales need rechallenge and dechallenge information that most routine reports do not contain, so incomplete reports can push both scales towards their middle categories and the agreement statistic then becomes an artefact of missing data; report the completeness of the underlying reports alongside the agreement.
Topic 13 / 43
Link to this entry
Potentially inappropriate medication use among elderly inpatients assessed by explicit prescribing criteria
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Proportion of patients with at least one potentially inappropriate medication by the stated criteria
Collection time
7 to 9 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 300 to 500 patients aged sixty-five and above, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Access to treatment charts for elderly admissions across medicine and allied units
- The current version of the explicit criteria being applied, in full
- A recorded diagnosis list, since most criteria are condition-specific
What derails it
These criteria are condition-dependent and a drug is only inappropriate in the presence of a particular diagnosis, so a case sheet that lists drugs but not comorbidities cannot be scored; check whether your source records diagnoses reliably before choosing this design.
Topic 14 / 43
Link to this entry
Potential drug-drug interactions in prescriptions of patients with multiple comorbidities, identified by a standard interaction database
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Proportion of prescriptions containing at least one potential interaction of major severity by the stated database
Collection time
6 to 8 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 400 to 600 prescriptions, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Access to a recognised interaction checking resource, with its version recorded
- Prescriptions that include every drug the patient takes, including those bought outside
- A written rule for which severity categories are counted
What derails it
A potential interaction flagged by a database is not a clinical event, and a thesis that reports the flags as though harm occurred will be pulled up; keep the outcome explicitly as a potential interaction and state which database version and severity grading produced it.
Topic 15 / 43
Link to this entry
Assessment of fixed dose combination products prescribed in an outpatient setting against the national list of approved combinations
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Proportion of prescribed fixed dose combinations present in the stated national approved list
Collection time
6 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 500 to 800 prescriptions, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- The current approved combinations list from the national regulator, downloaded and dated
- Prescriptions recorded with exact brand and ingredient composition
- A pharmacist or senior colleague to confirm ingredient identification for brands
What derails it
Brand names alone do not identify a combination's composition and the regulator's list is revised, so record every brand's full ingredient strength from the strip or the pharmacy database, and state the date of the list version you used because an undated comparison is not reproducible.
Topic 16 / 43
Link to this entry
Cost variation among brands of commonly prescribed oral drugs available in a hospital catchment
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Percentage cost variation between the highest and lowest priced brand for each selected molecule
Collection time
4 to 6 months of data collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 40 to 80 molecules with all available brands, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A current national drug price index or published price list, with its edition recorded
- A defined list of molecules chosen from prescription data rather than at random
- A rule for which pack sizes and strengths are compared
What derails it
Prices change with every edition of the index and differ between the index, the retail strip and the hospital pharmacy, so fix one source and one date for all comparisons and state it, otherwise the variation you report is partly the variation of your own sources.
Topic 17 / 43
Link to this entry
Availability of essential medicines at selected public health facilities assessed by a standard availability indicator
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Proportion of a defined basket of essential medicines available on the day of visit at each facility
Collection time
6 to 8 months of facility visits
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 15 to 30 facilities with a basket of 30 to 50 medicines, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- District health office permission to visit pharmacies and stores at each facility
- A defined medicine basket drawn from the essential list and the facility's own formulary
- A stock verification method that checks the shelf as well as the register
What derails it
Stock registers and shelves disagree, and availability on a single day is hostage to the supply cycle, so record the date relative to the last supply consignment for each facility and consider two visits per facility rather than one.
Topic 18 / 43
Link to this entry
Self-medication practices and the drugs used among undergraduate students in a health sciences institution
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Proportion reporting self-medication in the stated recall period, with the drug classes used
Collection time
4 to 6 months of data collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 300 to 500 students, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Institutional permission and a distribution route that does not go through class teachers
- A pre-tested questionnaire with drug categories illustrated by common brand names
- Anonymous collection, since the behaviour is one students know is discouraged
What derails it
Medical students know their drug categories well enough to be liable to under-report the very ones they know they should not be taking, so use brand prompts rather than class names and guarantee anonymity in a way they can see, such as a sealed box.
Topic 19 / 43
Link to this entry
Use of medicines without a prescription among adults attending a general outpatient department, with the sources used
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Proportion reporting use of any medicine without a prescription in the recall period, by source of the medicine
Collection time
6 to 8 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 350 to 550 attendees, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A clinic waiting area where interviews can be conducted without delaying care
- A pre-tested schedule with a prompt list of local preparations and strips to show
- A translator or local-language version if the clinic serves several language groups
What derails it
Patients waiting to see a doctor do not readily admit to buying antibiotics from a chemist in front of that doctor's clinic, so conduct interviews away from the consultation room and make clear that the investigator is not from the treating team.
Topic 20 / 43
Link to this entry
Medication adherence among patients on treatment for hypertension and the factors associated with it
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Adherence category on a validated self-report adherence scale
Collection time
6 to 8 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 300 to 450 patients, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A validated adherence instrument with permission for use and a local-language version
- A medicine clinic with patients on treatment for at least a stated minimum period
- Access to the prescription record to confirm the regimen being asked about
What derails it
Self-reported adherence is generous in a clinic setting, and a single question about missed doses will put almost everyone in the adherent category, so use the full validated instrument rather than selected items and report the distribution rather than a dichotomy alone.
Topic 21 / 43
Link to this entry
Performance of a self-report adherence questionnaire against pill count in patients on long-term oral therapy
DesignDiagnostic accuracyFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Sensitivity and specificity of the questionnaire against a stated pill count threshold as the reference standard
Collection time
10 to 12 months of enrolment and follow-up
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 150 to 250 patients, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A clinic where patients return at predictable intervals with their medicines
- An agreement that patients bring remaining strips to the follow-up visit
- A dispensing record that states exactly how many units were issued and when
What derails it
Pill count as a reference standard fails when patients discard or decant strips, and the instruction to bring medicines back itself improves adherence; record how many patients returned with countable medicine and treat that as a reported limitation rather than dropping them silently.
Topic 22 / 43
Link to this entry
Utilisation pattern of oral antidiabetic agents and insulin in a diabetes clinic, with treatment modification over one year
DesignRetrospectiveFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Distribution of prescribed regimens by class, with the proportion modified during the review period
Collection time
5 to 7 months of record work
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 400 to 700 patient records, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Clinic records or a register that follows the same patient across visits
- Ethics committee waiver of consent for record review
- A coding scheme for regimens and for what counts as a modification
What derails it
Following the same patient across visits requires a record system that actually links them, and in a paper outpatient setting the card stays with the patient rather than the clinic; confirm that linked longitudinal records exist before proposing anything that tracks change over time.
Topic 23 / 43
Link to this entry
Prescribing pattern of antiepileptic drugs in a neurology outpatient department with reference to monotherapy and polytherapy
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Proportion on monotherapy, with the distribution of agents and recorded reasons for combination therapy
Collection time
6 to 8 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 300 to 500 prescriptions, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Neurology or medicine department permission for clinic-based collection
- A seizure type or syndrome recorded on the prescription or card
- A reference classification for agents and indications
What derails it
Appropriateness of an antiepileptic cannot be judged without the seizure type, and clinic prescriptions often record only a diagnosis of epilepsy; decide whether you restrict the study to patients whose records state a seizure type, and report how many that excludes.
Topic 24 / 43
Link to this entry
Pattern of psychotropic drug prescribing in a psychiatry outpatient department
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Average number of psychotropic drugs per prescription, with the distribution by class and the proportion prescribed off-label by indication
Collection time
7 to 9 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 350 to 550 prescriptions, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Psychiatry department permission and an agreed confidentiality arrangement
- A diagnostic label recorded in a coded classification on the prescription or case record
- A reference source for approved indications, with its version stated
What derails it
Psychiatric case records carry a diagnosis that may be provisional and that patients do not wish disclosed, so your protocol must describe de-identification at the point of collection; an ethics committee will not accept a prescription photograph that carries the patient's name and diagnosis together.
Topic 25 / 43
Link to this entry
Use of topical corticosteroid preparations before presentation among patients attending a dermatology outpatient department
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Proportion who had used a topical corticosteroid-containing preparation before presentation, by the source advising it
Collection time
6 to 8 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 300 to 500 patients, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Dermatology collaboration, since the preparation must be identified clinically
- A photograph set or sample strips of commonly available combination creams to show patients
- A list of the corticosteroid-containing combinations marketed locally
What derails it
Patients do not know whether the cream they used contained a steroid, so identification depends on them bringing the tube or recognising it from a display; build the visual prompt set during pre-testing, because an interview without it simply records that patients do not know.
Topic 26 / 43
Link to this entry
Prescription writing errors and legibility in handwritten outpatient prescriptions at a teaching hospital
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Proportion of prescriptions with at least one error in the predefined categories of omission, legibility or ambiguity
Collection time
5 to 7 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 500 to 900 prescriptions, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Permission to photocopy or photograph prescriptions with prescriber identity masked
- A written error taxonomy fixed before collection starts
- Two independent assessors for legibility, with an agreement check
What derails it
Legibility is a judgement and two assessors can disagree on a large share of prescriptions unless the categories are anchored with examples, so run a calibration set before collection and report inter-rater agreement; and mask the prescriber, because a study that can identify individual doctors will not be cleared.
Topic 27 / 43
Link to this entry
Generic name prescribing in outpatient prescriptions before and after an institutional prescribing directive
DesignComparative interventionalFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Proportion of drugs written by generic name in each period
Collection time
10 to 12 months covering both periods
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 400 to 600 prescriptions per period, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A dated institutional directive or circular that marks the change
- Comparable sampling at the same clinics and times in both periods
- Permission from the departments sampled in both phases
What derails it
A before-and-after study around an administrative circular measures the circular plus everything else that changed that month, including new residents rotating in, so sample the same clinics at the same points in the academic year and say plainly that other changes cannot be excluded.
Topic 28 / 43
Link to this entry
Cost of insulin therapy borne by patients attending a diabetes clinic, in relation to household income
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Monthly out-of-pocket cost of insulin and supplies, expressed as a share of reported household income
Collection time
7 to 9 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 200 to 350 patients, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A diabetes clinic with patients on insulin for at least a stated minimum duration
- A costing schedule that includes needles, strips and travel, not the vial alone
- A defensible way of recording household income, such as a standard socioeconomic scale
What derails it
Patients under-report income and forget the cost of needles, strips and the bus fare to the clinic, which can be a large part of what insulin actually costs them; use an itemised prompt list and a standard socioeconomic classification rather than a single income question.
Topic 29 / 43
Link to this entry
Effect of a problem-based teaching module on rational prescribing skills among final year undergraduate students
DesignComparative interventionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Score on a structured prescription writing exercise before and after the module
Collection time
8 to 10 months within the academic calendar
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 100 to 180 students, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Departmental and curriculum committee agreement, since teaching time must be allotted
- A validated prescription writing assessment rubric with blinded marking
- Two comparable student batches or a crossover arrangement
What derails it
Students sit the post-test knowing it is an assessment of themselves rather than of the module, and those who attended are self-selected for interest; arrange blinded marking by a colleague who did not teach the module and record attendance so that the analysis can account for it.
Topic 30 / 43
Link to this entry
Knowledge of antimicrobial resistance and stewardship principles among interns and first-year residents
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Knowledge score on a pre-tested instrument covering resistance mechanisms, spectrum and stewardship practice
Collection time
4 to 6 months of data collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 200 to 350 respondents, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Institutional permission and access to the intern and resident roster
- An instrument pre-tested for item clarity with reliability reported
- A distribution method that prevents respondents consulting each other or a reference
What derails it
A knowledge questionnaire circulated as an online form is answered with a search engine open in the next tab, and the scores become meaningless; administer it in a supervised session or accept and state that the score measures accessible rather than recalled knowledge.
Topic 31 / 43
Link to this entry
Evaluation of drug promotional literature distributed to prescribers against World Health Organization ethical criteria
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Proportion of promotional items fulfilling each of the stated ethical criteria for medicinal drug promotion
Collection time
6 to 8 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 150 to 300 promotional items, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A systematic collection route, such as a fixed box in selected outpatient departments
- The full text of the criteria being applied, with a scoring sheet
- Two assessors scoring independently, with disagreement resolved by a third
What derails it
Collection by convenience gives you whatever was lying on a table, which over-represents a few companies, so define the collection window and the clinics in advance and report how many items came from each source rather than presenting a pooled total.
Topic 32 / 43
Link to this entry
Medication errors identified at the prescribing and transcription stages in inpatient treatment charts
DesignProspective observationalFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Number of errors per hundred medication orders, by error category
Collection time
10 to 12 months of chart review
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 2000 to 4000 medication orders, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Daily access to inpatient treatment charts in the selected wards
- A written error classification and a clinical colleague to adjudicate contested items
- An explicit understanding with the ward that findings are de-identified and non-punitive
What derails it
Naming a ward or a prescriber turns an error study into a disciplinary document and co-operation ends immediately, so agree the de-identification and reporting format in writing with the head of department before the first chart is opened.
Topic 33 / 43
Link to this entry
Serum phenytoin concentrations in patients on maintenance therapy in relation to prescribed dose and reported seizure control
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityDemanding
Primary outcome
Proportion of patients with a serum concentration within, below or above the stated reference range
Collection time
12 to 15 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 100 to 180 patients, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A laboratory that can assay the drug reliably, with a documented method and quality control
- A sampling rule fixing the time since the last dose for every patient
- Neurology collaboration for dose and seizure history
What derails it
A concentration is uninterpretable without a known time since the last dose and a steady state, and patients cannot recall either precisely; if the laboratory assay is not already running routinely with quality control, do not build a thesis on it.
Topic 34 / 43
Link to this entry
Medicines associated with admission for an adverse drug event: a case-control study in a medicine unit
DesignCase-controlFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Odds of prior exposure to candidate drug classes in cases admitted with an adverse drug event compared with controls
Collection time
12 months of enrolment
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 80 to 120 cases with one or two controls each, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A case definition and an adjudication panel, since attributing admission to a drug is a judgement
- Complete drug history at admission, including over-the-counter and traditional preparations
- A written control selection rule from the same admitting unit
What derails it
Deciding that an admission was caused by a drug rather than by the disease is the whole study, so a single investigator's opinion will not stand; fix a two-person adjudication with a documented disagreement rule before enrolment begins.
Topic 35 / 43
Link to this entry
Medication review in elderly outpatients: number of drugs, duplication and opportunities for discontinuation identified by explicit criteria
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Number of medicines per patient, with the proportion having at least one therapeutic duplication or criterion-based discontinuation indication
Collection time
7 to 9 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 250 to 400 patients, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A geriatric or general medicine clinic and permission to interview patients about all medicines
- A request that patients bring every strip and bottle they take, including from other doctors
- Explicit criteria for duplication and for discontinuation, fixed in advance
What derails it
The true drug list is the bag of strips the patient carries, not the clinic prescription, and patients leave the other doctor's medicines at home unless told to bring them; put that instruction into the appointment slip or accept that you are auditing one clinic's prescription only.
Topic 36 / 43
Link to this entry
Concordance between prescribed antimicrobial therapy and culture sensitivity reports in inpatients
DesignRetrospectiveFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Proportion of cases in which therapy was modified in line with the sensitivity report within a stated interval
Collection time
6 to 8 months of record work
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 250 to 450 culture-positive episodes, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Microbiology laboratory records linkable to individual case sheets
- Treatment charts that record the date of every drug change
- Ethics committee waiver of consent for record review
What derails it
Linking a culture report to the case sheet fails far more often than expected because laboratory registers and ward records use different identifiers; pilot the linkage on fifty records first, since an unlinkable sample makes this study impossible.
Topic 37 / 43
Link to this entry
Use of injectable preparations in an outpatient setting and the documented indication for each
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Proportion of encounters involving an injectable, with the proportion having a recorded indication meeting stated criteria
Collection time
6 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 500 to 800 encounters, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A collection point that captures the injection room as well as the prescription
- Criteria defining when the parenteral route is appropriate, fixed in advance
- Permission from the clinical unit and the injection room staff
What derails it
Injections given in the clinic's injection room frequently never appear on the prescription that leaves with the patient, so a prescription-only sample understates injection use badly; collect at the injection room as well and report the two sources separately.
Topic 38 / 43
Link to this entry
Utilisation of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in an orthopaedic outpatient department, with co-prescription of gastroprotection
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Distribution of agents prescribed, with the proportion co-prescribed a gastroprotective agent
Collection time
6 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 400 to 600 prescriptions, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Orthopaedic department permission for clinic-based prescription collection
- A recorded duration of therapy on the prescription, since risk depends on it
- A criterion set for when gastroprotection is indicated
What derails it
Gastroprotection is only indicated in defined risk groups, so reporting a bare co-prescription proportion tells the reader nothing; collect the risk factors that define the indication and report appropriateness rather than frequency, which means your proforma must capture age, comorbidity and duration.
Topic 39 / 43
Link to this entry
Adverse events following immunisation reported to an institutional pharmacovigilance centre over three years
DesignRetrospectiveFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Distribution of reported events by type, vaccine implicated and reported severity
Collection time
4 to 6 months of record work
Sample, as a planning figure
every report held for the stated period, a complete enumeration rather than a calculated sample
What your unit must already have
- Access to the pharmacovigilance centre or immunisation clinic report archive
- The current case definitions for adverse events following immunisation
- Ethics committee waiver of consent for record review
What derails it
Spontaneously reported events describe reporting behaviour, not occurrence, and a thesis that presents counts without a denominator invites the criticism that it has measured nothing; state the number of doses administered in the same period if it can be obtained, and say so plainly if it cannot.
Topic 40 / 43
Link to this entry
Concordance of antihypertensive prescribing in a medicine outpatient department with a stated national guideline
DesignCross-sectionalFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Proportion of prescriptions concordant with the stated guideline for the recorded comorbidity profile
Collection time
6 to 8 months of collection
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 350 to 550 prescriptions, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A named, dated guideline to audit against, agreed with the medicine department
- Recorded comorbidities, since guideline choices are condition-specific
- A clinic collection slot and a de-identified data sheet
What derails it
Guideline concordance cannot be judged where the record does not state the comorbidity that drives the choice, and diabetes or renal disease is frequently absent from an outpatient card; report the proportion of prescriptions that were assessable, because that number is itself the finding.
Topic 41 / 43
Link to this entry
Pattern of queries received by a hospital drug information service and the sources used to answer them
DesignRetrospectiveFeasibilityStraightforward
Primary outcome
Distribution of queries by category of enquirer and type of information sought, with the time taken to respond
Collection time
4 to 5 months of record work
Sample, as a planning figure
every query logged over a stated two to three years, a complete enumeration rather than a calculated sample
What your unit must already have
- A drug information service with a maintained query log
- A classification scheme for query type, fixed before coding
- Institutional permission, with enquirer identity removed
What derails it
This is only viable where the query log has been kept consistently, and most such logs have long gaps when the staff member maintaining them changed; check the completeness month by month before proposing the period, and exclude rather than interpolate the gaps.
Topic 42 / 43
Link to this entry
Bleeding events in patients newly started on oral anticoagulant therapy, followed for six months
DesignCohortFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Occurrence of any clinically relevant bleeding event by a stated definition within six months of starting therapy
Collection time
15 to 18 months including follow-up
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 150 to 250 patients, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- A medicine or cardiology clinic that initiates anticoagulation and will refer consecutive patients
- A bleeding event definition with an adjudication rule and a clinician to apply it
- A telephone and clinic follow-up schedule at fixed intervals, with two contact numbers per patient
What derails it
Minor bleeding is treated at home or by a local practitioner and never reaches your clinic, so a follow-up that waits for the patient to report in will capture only the severe events; the structured telephone call must ask about gum bleeding, bruising and black stools by name at every contact.
Topic 43 / 43
Link to this entry
A randomised comparison of case-based small group teaching with conventional lecture for prescription writing skills among undergraduate students
DesignRandomised controlledFeasibilityModerate
Primary outcome
Score on a blinded structured prescription writing assessment after the teaching intervention
Collection time
10 to 12 months within the academic calendar
Sample, as a planning figure
roughly 50 to 80 students per arm, subject to a proper calculation
What your unit must already have
- Curriculum committee agreement, since both arms must receive teaching of equal total duration
- A documented randomisation of students to arms, with allocation held by someone outside the teaching team
- A validated assessment rubric marked blind to allocation
What derails it
Students in the two arms share notes the same evening, so contamination between arms is the central threat and it cannot be eliminated in one batch; schedule both arms in the same session window, state the contamination risk openly, and do not claim an effect size that the design cannot isolate.

The designs

What each design commits you to

The designs in this Pharmacology register

The design is not a label on the title; it decides your ethics route, your timetable and the test that answers your primary question. Only the designs that appear above are explained here.

Cross-sectional
27 topics
One contact per participant. Usually the quickest to complete, and the design most often chosen when time is short.
Prospective observational
5 topics
Participants are followed after enrolment without allocating an intervention. Ethics approval must precede the first enrolment.
Retrospective
4 topics
Existing records only. Faster, but limited by what was recorded, and a waiver of consent is normally sought from the ethics committee.
Comparative interventional
3 topics
Two or more arms compared. Ethics scrutiny is heavier, and the protocol must state how allocation is handled.
Randomised controlled
1 topic
Allocation is randomised. Prospective interventional studies are registered with the Clinical Trials Registry of India before the first participant is enrolled.
Diagnostic accuracy
1 topic
An index test measured against a reference standard. The sample size depends on the expected sensitivity or specificity and the prevalence in your setting.
Case-control
1 topic
Cases and controls compared for prior exposure. Control selection is where these are most often criticised.
Cohort
1 topic
A defined group followed over time. Attrition is the usual threat, so plan for it in the sample size.

What the feasibility mark means

A judgement about a typical teaching unit, not about yours. Confirm the volume, the equipment and the co-operation a topic needs before your synopsis goes in, because after that the timetable stops being negotiable^[2].

Straightforward
24 topics
Achievable in most teaching units with routine caseload and no equipment beyond what is already in use.
Moderate
17 topics
Achievable, but needs either a specific piece of equipment, a collaborating department, or a caseload you should confirm before committing.
Demanding
2 topics
Only take this on if your unit already has the volume, the equipment and the co-operation it needs. Confirm all three before your synopsis goes in.

Next steps

Before you commit to one

What to do with a topic you like

Three steps, in this order. None of them is us: the first is arithmetic, the second is your guide, the third is a search only you can run.

Do the arithmetic
The figure on each plate is a planning range, not an answer. Put your own assumptions — the difference you would call clinically meaningful, the variability you expect, the power you want — into the free sample size calculator, then divide the result by the eligible patients your unit sees in a month and see whether the months you have left permit it.
Take it to your guide
Nothing on this page is approved by anybody. Your guide and your department decide what is feasible in your unit, and your ethics committee decides whether it may start — before the first participant, not before the analysis^[5]. Where your university ordinance is stricter than anything here, the ordinance wins^[1].
Run the search yourself
We make no claim that any question here is novel, under-studied or a gap, because that depends on a literature search run today in your own field. Read what the search returns before you write the introduction, and be ready to say why the question is worth asking in your setting.

What a thesis in this field has to satisfy — the obligations, the statistics and the questions residents ask first — is set out on the Pharmacology page. Other specialties are in the topic bank index, and the method is worked through in the guides.

Undertakings

Mechanisms, not promises

What protects your draft, and who owns the work

Each line below is a mechanism this platform implements or a published instrument it is built around. None of them is a guarantee, and we are affiliated with no regulator or university.

Protection of your work

Row-level security
Every table enforces row-level access. You read your own record, and nothing else.
View-only streaming
Drafts are streamed to you through an authenticated route, not handed over as a file.
Watermarked to you
Every page you read carries your own name and email across it.
Download gated
The final file unlocks when the fee is settled in full, and not before.
Mumbai region · DPDP 2023
Your record and your documents are held in the Mumbai region, so India's Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 applies to them.
Anonymised data only
We accept no patient identifiers. An NDA is available on request.

How this works

Instruments we work to

NMC PGMER-2023
The thesis obligations set out in the postgraduate medical education regulations.
NBEMS
DNB and DrNB protocol and thesis timelines, and the page limit, as published.
UGC 2018 · <10%
The academic integrity convention we work to on every draft.
ICMJE · Vancouver
Authorship criteria and reference style, applied as published.
No affiliation
We work to these published instruments. We are affiliated to none of the bodies that issue them.

How this works

Authorship and the uniqueness check

Sole author
Mentoring, editing, statistics and compliance. You remain the sole author of your thesis.
Not ghostwriting
We will not write your thesis for you, and we will not be named in it.
MDSoftune
Word-level uniqueness checking, built with REDENN Informatics Inc., Canada.
Every version
Each draft is checked word by word before your university sees it.

How this works

MDThesis is an independent academic mentorship practice. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting for the NMC, NBEMS, UGC or any university.

Free feasibility call

Tell us where your thesis stands. A senior doctor will tell you what to do next.

A senior doctor replies within one working day. No obligation. MD, MS, DNB, DrNB, DM, MCh, MDS and international programmes.

Request for a feasibility call

No obligation

Reply within one working day · No obligation · Your details are not shared

Prefer to write to us first? Contact the practice. We mentor and edit; you remain the sole author of your thesis.

References

[1]
Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023, National Medical Commission. In force 1 January 2024. Thesis requirements at Regulation 5.2. nmc.org.in
[2]
DNB and DrNB thesis guidelines, National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences. Protocol within 180 days of joining for three-year courses and 90 days for the two-year post-diploma DNB; research study complete by 24 months; thesis by 26 months; 80-page limit inclusive of certificates and annexures. natboard.edu.in
[5]
National Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical and Health Research Involving Human Participants, 2017, Indian Council of Medical Research. Ethics approval precedes data collection. icmr.gov.in
[6]
Counts of specialties, tracked stages, supported currencies and supported countries are structural facts of this platform, read from its own configuration rather than from a claim.

Document: Topic bank — Pharmacology · Revision 1 · Last reviewed 10 SEPT 2026

Issued by MDThesis, a brand of REDENN Informatics Private Limited

Pharmacology thesis topics, with the design and feasibility for eachPharmacology thesis topics, with the design and feasibility for each

Prescribing pattern in the general outpatient department of a teaching hospital assessed by World Health Organization core prescribing indicators

Audit of prescriptions in a paediatric outpatient department against rational prescribing criteria

Drug utilisation in a general medicine ward expressed in defined daily doses per hundred bed-days

Antimicrobial use in inpatients classified by the World Health Organization access, watch and reserve categories

Appropriateness of surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis in elective operations against institutional policy

Adverse drug reactions in a medicine ward detected by intensive monitoring, with causality, severity and preventability assessment

Adverse drug reactions to anti-tubercular therapy among patients on treatment at a programme treatment centre

Pattern of adverse drug reactions to first-line antiretroviral therapy at an antiretroviral therapy centre

Adverse drug reactions during cancer chemotherapy in a day-care oncology unit, graded by a standard toxicity criteria scale

Knowledge, attitude and practice of adverse drug reaction reporting among resident doctors and nurses in a teaching hospital

Effect of a structured sensitisation programme on adverse drug reaction reporting by resident doctors

Agreement between two standard causality assessment scales applied to reported adverse drug reactions

Potentially inappropriate medication use among elderly inpatients assessed by explicit prescribing criteria

Potential drug-drug interactions in prescriptions of patients with multiple comorbidities, identified by a standard interaction database

Assessment of fixed dose combination products prescribed in an outpatient setting against the national list of approved combinations

Cost variation among brands of commonly prescribed oral drugs available in a hospital catchment

Availability of essential medicines at selected public health facilities assessed by a standard availability indicator

Self-medication practices and the drugs used among undergraduate students in a health sciences institution

Use of medicines without a prescription among adults attending a general outpatient department, with the sources used

Medication adherence among patients on treatment for hypertension and the factors associated with it

Performance of a self-report adherence questionnaire against pill count in patients on long-term oral therapy

Utilisation pattern of oral antidiabetic agents and insulin in a diabetes clinic, with treatment modification over one year

Prescribing pattern of antiepileptic drugs in a neurology outpatient department with reference to monotherapy and polytherapy

Pattern of psychotropic drug prescribing in a psychiatry outpatient department

Use of topical corticosteroid preparations before presentation among patients attending a dermatology outpatient department

Prescription writing errors and legibility in handwritten outpatient prescriptions at a teaching hospital

Generic name prescribing in outpatient prescriptions before and after an institutional prescribing directive

Cost of insulin therapy borne by patients attending a diabetes clinic, in relation to household income

Effect of a problem-based teaching module on rational prescribing skills among final year undergraduate students

Knowledge of antimicrobial resistance and stewardship principles among interns and first-year residents

Evaluation of drug promotional literature distributed to prescribers against World Health Organization ethical criteria

Medication errors identified at the prescribing and transcription stages in inpatient treatment charts

Serum phenytoin concentrations in patients on maintenance therapy in relation to prescribed dose and reported seizure control

Medicines associated with admission for an adverse drug event: a case-control study in a medicine unit

Medication review in elderly outpatients: number of drugs, duplication and opportunities for discontinuation identified by explicit criteria

Concordance between prescribed antimicrobial therapy and culture sensitivity reports in inpatients

Use of injectable preparations in an outpatient setting and the documented indication for each

Utilisation of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in an orthopaedic outpatient department, with co-prescription of gastroprotection

Adverse events following immunisation reported to an institutional pharmacovigilance centre over three years

Concordance of antihypertensive prescribing in a medicine outpatient department with a stated national guideline

Pattern of queries received by a hospital drug information service and the sources used to answer them

Bleeding events in patients newly started on oral anticoagulant therapy, followed for six months

A randomised comparison of case-based small group teaching with conventional lecture for prescription writing skills among undergraduate students

What the feasibility mark means

Tell us where your thesis stands. A senior doctor will tell you what to do next.

Pharmacology thesis topics, with the design and feasibility for each