eBU is now live with papers for comment!


eBU can now be accessed

I am delighted to announce that eBU, the online BU journal that operates on the basis of immediate publication and open peer review, is now live with two papers ready for comment.

Jane Murphy (HSC), Louise Worswick (HSC), Andy Pullman, Grainne Ford (Royal Bournemouth Hospital) and Jaana Jeffery (HSC PhD student) suggest that e-learning is a great way to deliver nutririon education and training for health care staff who are involved in the care pathway for cancer survivors. The abstract can be found below:

Health care professionals are in a prime position to provide diet and lifestyle advice, but there are gaps in their own knowledge and education highlighting the need for improvements in teaching and learning approaches. This paper presents the rationale for the design, implementation and evaluation of an e-learning resource to deliver nutrition education and training for health care staff who are involved in the care pathway for cancer survivors. The findings of the evaluation are discussed and the importance of the resource in terms of its impact upon the provision of nutrition, diet and lifestyle advice in practice for the delivery of care and support of cancer survivors.

This paper can be accessed here –


Dorothy Fox (ST) uses original research to discuss the dynamics of doctoral supervision and provides recommendations for improving supervisory practice. The abstract can be found below:


This article reports an exploratory study of the professional relationships between supervisors who co-supervise management doctoral students in England. It draws on the concept and theoretical framework of emotional geographies (Hargreaves 2001) to understand the affective elements of these relationships. Team supervision has become mandatory in many Western universities and whilst the advantages and disadvantages of this development have been identified, the relationship between supervisors has not received the same attention. This is despite the evidence from students that positive or negative relationships within the supervisory team are of critical relevance to a successful outcome. Data from 13 in-depth interviews with supervisors was analysed and the emotional geographies are revealed. Further analysis showed that differences within the relationship are resolved in ways that are either ‘autocratic’, ‘overtly democratic’ or ‘covertly democratic’. With the aim of improving the quality of supervisory practice, the implications for doctoral supervision are discussed.

This paper can be accessed here –