In this article we explore how examiners assess a thesis that includes published work. An online survey was used to gather data on approaches to assessing publication-based theses (PBTs). The respondents were 62 supervisors who had experience examining PBTs across a range of disciplines at a research-intensive university in New Zealand. Nearly half of the respondents had examined 'hybrid' theses with papers inserted as chapters, 41% had examined theses with publications appended and 14% had examined PhDs by publication (i.e. papers alone). Twenty-nine per cent of examiners used their own extended set of criteria to assess PBTs, 48% found them easier to assess but 26% wanted more guidance. Our analysis also indicated that 86% of the examiners were highly influenced by publications in top-ranked journals and international peer-reviewed journals. Among the concerns of the examiners was the intellectual input of the candidate in any multi-authored publication, as well as the coherence of the thesis. We recommend the need for clearer guidelines for doctoral candidates, supervisors and examiners managing PBTs.