Organizing committee - XIV CAML · IV NeurULisboa Ph.D. Students Virtual Meeting

 

 

They caught our attention a few weeks ago. They asked us subtly if we could involve them more in the events of the Faculty. We arranged successive meetings and drew up a joint work plan.

There were several interlocutors, always available to be involved, from the beginning, in a communication exchange that seeks to be more inclusive. The challenge could not be fairer and necessary. Part of a Faculty that validates their final diploma, Ph.D. students elevate the Institution with numbers that reflect great success until the conclusion of their theses, through the articles they publish and the professional placements they present. They are part of the Doctoral Programme of the Lisbon Academic Medical Centre (CAML) that acts as the triangle between the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Lisbon (FMUL), the Institute of Molecular Medicine João Lobo Antunes (iMM) and the Santa Maria University Hospital (HSM-CHLN).

In the meeting between the parties, students embrace research projects, whether in the area of Biomedical Sciences, Medicine, or Health Sciences and Technologies. They have common objectives, which is to develop an ideal, mature it and confront it in the end.

In order to increase dynamics between laboratory research and clinical practice, the three entities are represented through the Board and the Scientific Committee that manage the entire Doctoral Programme.

It is in this context that we find this entrepreneurial group of doctoral students who, representing the various years and areas, came together to create the IV NeurULisboa Ph.D. Students Virtual Meeting, the annual event that brings together students and ideas.

We met André, Anwesha, Diogo, Inês, Joana, Leonor, Madalena, Mariana, Raquel, Rita, Rui, and Sara and through them we made a commitment. They help to create an annual group that represents them and we will maintain close ties to make them believe that the path is worthwhile, even if it is sometimes silent.

 

 

How did you form this working group that organizes the Ph.D. Meeting? How are people from different areas mobilized to communicate this event together?

Each annual edition of this student meeting marks the end of one cycle (and the beginning of another). The work of the CAML doctoral student committee, which comprises several subcommittees (working groups) dedicated to promoting various annual events and activities, of a more or less frequent nature, contributes to the creation and the group spirit of the community of CAML doctoral students. These activities are designed by students for students.

This way, these working groups are created on a voluntary basis for the organization and promotion of various activities, such as the Pizza Seminars, Science Careers, workshops and the annual Doctoral Students' retreat. In our case, this group aimed to organize the Annual Meeting of CAML Ph.D. Students. After the annual meeting, there is a meeting open to all Ph.D. students where they can volunteer for one (or several) working groups depending on their availability and preferences. It is important to note that these working groups are really hard work and students end up having to invest both part of their academic time and part of their free time to organize these activities. In our case, the organization of this complex and dynamic event took several months. We worked several hours after work to be able to create this edition of the event the best we could, always with the aim of making it interesting and unforgettable for our colleagues.

 

What is the importance of maintaining this Meeting in academic life?

In a different and challenging year for so many reasons, the organizing committee of the CAML Ph.D. Student Meeting wanted, in 2021, to revive the meeting that had been pending since 2020. For many students, the meeting is the opportunity to exchange ideas and experiences, providing them with the  opportunity to discuss our work with other colleagues, many of them from different areas.

We believe that part of Science is done through talking, and this edition of the meeting will not only be another fundamental occasion for our scientific training, but also, without any doubt, one that will revitalize and strengthen the group spirit of this School. In this edition, and with the objective that we already had in mind for the postponed edition of 2020, we want to celebrate the diversity that characterizes the CAML. All our efforts as an organizing committee have been to alleviate the challenges experienced in the last few months, which have affected both the productivity and physical and mental health of our students, and to foster the interaction between basic research and its clinical application. This interdisciplinary between basic science and medicine characterizes and distinguishes the CAML.

 

What can we expect from this year's meeting that has a new digital format?

As expected, thinking about a meeting in a completely digital format was not easy, not least because the organization of this meeting receives help and the testimonials from previous committees. Despite the need to have this meeting, for the first time, in a digital format, we tried to minimize the lack of “face to face” interaction and, at the same time, maximize the advantages of having a virtual meeting. We believe that we can expect the same dynamic and diverse environment in promoting a scientific discussion of excellence. We have the presence of guest speakers who, as has become customary at this student meeting, come to inspire our student community, both with the success of their scientific careers in various areas (artificial intelligence, astrobiology, clinical research in the oncology field or biomedical research in the field of neurosciences), but also through the vision they bring us about what it means to be a scientist.

In addition, this year we decided to organize, for the first time, a graphical abstracts contest, which was very well received by the students. We received about 30 works, which will be evaluated by a panel of judges composed by journalist Vera Novais (president SciCom PT - Rede de Comunicação de Ciência e Tecnologia de Portugal  (Science and Technology Communication Network of Portugal and journalist at Observador), by bioinformatics and scientific illustrator Christof De Bo, and scientific illustrators Gil Costa and Diogo Guerra. We also had the presence of speaker Fernando Baptista, graphic editor at  National Geographic  and internationally recognized for his experience in infographics, in a virtual seminar that precedes the meeting and motivates the audience regarding the importance of graphic communication.

This contest aimed to challenge students to test their creative abilities, as well as to deconstruct their scientific work so that it can be explained to a wide audience through an illustration. This initiative follows the current trend of creating/sharing graphic abstracts, and many scientific journals have had to update, often requiring a graphic abstract of the scientific article in question.

 How do you explain that so few doctors participate in this event?

To answer this question, we have to understand the context in which the decision to do a Ph.D. for the various students in the CAML community takes place. If, on the one hand, we have younger students, usually with basic training in basic areas (life sciences and engineering), who usually enter a Ph.D. at 22-25 years of age, soon after completing a master degree, we also have students with a clinical career spanning several years, trained doctors (many finishing their internship/specialty) who normally start the doctorate when they are over 30 years of age. Obviously, it is easy to see that the experience of doing a full-time Ph.D., typical of non-clinical students is quite different from that of clinical students. Many medical students have the demanding task of coordinating their academic activity with clinical practice. They have several practical reasons for not being able to guarantee their presence at the meeting. However, the meeting’s organizing committee, in all editions, has been trying to bring these students together. It is no coincidence that this year's theme revolves around diversity. We know that the different Ph.D. experiences are learning opportunities and that the clinical and non-clinical areas bring together and foster new scientific collaborations. Thus, the sharing of ideas and discussion during this event brings benefits and learning to everyone.

In a previous meeting, one of you said something that stuck with me, “in the  year 1 we arrive with some romantic ideas about the event, but then in the last year we are more realistic about the way science is done”. What's up with the Ph.D. students? What are your big disappointments?

The scientific activity of everyday life is quite different from the romantic idea that many of us have when we start our project. Obviously we are not naive to think that we can change the world, but we dream that our work will, in a way, contribute to the scientific advancement of humanity. In the year 1 of the Ph.D., our focus is on the question that intrigues us and on the scientific method that will allow us to arrive at the answer to that question, or will help us to generate other questions that intrigue us even more. There are, of course, several constraints that make it a winding journey, which put us to the test, testing our physical and psychological limits. Resilience is always there. This process is an ongoing discovery about what it is like to be a scientist and our own abilities as individuals. It is more than natural that, in the last few months, especially in the middle of a pandemic, we are more tired and our vision of how science happens is more "realistic" and less "romantic". This does not mean that doing a Ph.D. is not worthwhile and that the whole process is not enriching!

 

If it were possible for you to get your hands on the management of the Ph.D. Scientific Committee, what measures would you take that are not currently taken?

We would try to bring institutional structures, such as the Scientific Committee, closer to students, promoting clear and efficient communication between the two parties, in order to make the most of the work of this committee. We believe that it is essential that all information is easily accessible and that the characteristics that distinguish the CAML doctoral programme are clearly and transparently summarized. This would not only be an asset for all students currently enrolled, but would also give a clear and international view of what this programme is about (good publicity).

In addition, trying to reduce the necessary and redundant bureaucracy would also help in our day-to-day lives. Another important aspect that we could try to understand better would be the importance of the fees and emoluments that the faculty charges doctoral students (both the 80 euros for enrolling in the programme, as well as the 500 euros when submitting the thesis), in order to minimize these procedural costs and bring us closer to improved scenarios that other universities in the country have already adopted.

 

How many of you are going to conduct just research? What do the others expect?

Throughout the Ph.D., each person tries to discover the path to follow. It may not be an easy decision and may need to be weighed against many factors. In the national context in which we find ourselves today, there are also many external factors, such as the (in) existence of funding for research. The most important thing is that each one of us chooses the career that best fits our future perspectives and is attentive in order to identify and take advantage of the opportunities that appear to us. Sometimes it is necessary to be in the right place at the right time, other times it takes a lot of resilience and some financial availability. In short, there are several factors involved in the final choice of the path to take. And since we are all researchers, scientists, it is difficult to even understand what it is like to “just pursue research”. In the end, we are “only” doing research, but we also give lectures for the dissemination of science (in schools and national events), we teach, review and write scientific articles, we co-supervise undergraduate and master students, we participate in doctoral student committees... In addition to all that, we are young and, as such, we also have our personal activities and projects that occupy our free time (sports, artistic, political, volunteer work, etc.). All of this is essential to keep the body and mind healthy and to allow us to explore other abilities besides the intellectual ones. Participating in this committee, for example, allows us to have contact and test other types of skills (communication or organization) - some of the so-called soft skills - that can help us understand what we want to do next.

 

Nome	Year	Research Field (Laboratory)	CAML Doctoral Programme
André Gabriel	1º	Molecular and Genetic Biology (Analytical and Structural Biochemistry Unit)	FCT individual grant
Anwesha Gosh	3º	Neuroscience  (Ana Sebastião Lab)	Neuroscience  Ph.D. Programme
Diogo Lourenço	3º	Neuroscience  (Ana Sebastião Lab)	Neuroscience  Ph.D. Programme
Inês Faleiro	4º	Molecular Biology (Sérgio de Almeida Lab)	LisbonBioMed PhD Programme
Joana Mateus	2º	Neuroscience (Ana Sebastião Lab)	NeurULisboa PhD Programme
Leonor Rodrigues	2º	Neuroscience (Ana Sebastião Lab)	NeurULisboa PhD Programme
Madalena Almeida	1º	Molecular Biology (Sérgio de Almeida Lab)	FCT individual grant
Mariana Ferreira	4º	Computational Biology (Nuno Morais Lab)	LisbonBioMed PhD Programme
Raquel Azevedo	3º	Parasitology (Miguel Prudêncio Lab)	FCT individual grant
Rita Belo	5º	Neuroscience and Bioinformatics (Ana Sebastião Lab and Nuno Morais Lab)	M2B PhD Programme
Rui Lourenço Teixeira	3º	Rheumatology (João Eurico Fonseca Lab) and Histology (Institute of Histology and Developmental Biology FMUL)	FCT individual grant
Sara Paulo	2º	Neuroscience  (Ana Sebastião Lab)	NeurULisboa PhD Programme