Category / Research themes

New Public Health paper on Christmas Eve

Publishing, writing

Douglas 2015 Men healthOur latest paper and the last one for 2015, published the day before Christmas.  The paper ‘Implementing Health Policy: Lessons from the Scottish Well Men’s Policy Initiative’ appeared in AIMS Public Health [1].  The paper draws on evaluation research led by Dr. Flora Douglas (University of Aberdeen).  This was a set of evaluations of the Well Men’s Health projects which were part of an initiative running in many health regions (or health boards as they are called in Scotland).

 

The focus of this particular paper centres around the fact that little is known about how health professionals translate government health policy into action [2]. Our paper examines that process using the  Scottish Well Men’s Services policy initiative as a ‘real world’ case study [1]. These Well Men’s Services were launched by the Scottish Government to address men’s health inequalities. Our analysis aimed to develop a deeper understanding of policy implementation as it naturally occurred.  We used an analytical framework that was developed to reflect the ‘rational planning’ principles health professionals are commonly encouraged to use for implementation purposes.

Our analysis revealed four key themes: (1) ambiguity regarding the policy problem and means of intervention; (2) behavioral framing of the policy problem and intervention; (3) uncertainty about the policy evidence base and outcomes, and; (4) a focus on intervention as outcome. This study found that mechanistic planning heuristics (as a means of supporting implementation) fails to grapple with the indeterminate nature of population health problems. A new approach to planning and implementing public health interventions is required that recognises the complex and political nature of health problems; the inevitability of imperfect and contested evidence regarding intervention, and, future associated uncertainties.

 

The paper is published in an Open Access journal, so it is easily and freely available to public health professionals, policy-makers and health workers across the globe.

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen 

CMMPH

 

Reference:

  1. Douglas, F., van Teijlingen, E., Smith, W.C.S., Moffat, M. (2015) Implementing Health Policy: Lessons from the Scottish Well Men’s Policy Initiative, AIMS Public Health 2 (4): 887-905. http://www.aimspress.com/article/10.3934/publichealth.2015.4.887/fulltext.html
  2. Killoran, A., Kelly, M. (2004) Towards an evidence-based approach to tackling health inequalities: The English experience. Health Education Journal;63: 7-14.

Mixed methods: not without its downside?

REF Subjects

Prof Edwin van Teijlingen

Conducting mixed-methods research has become very popular over the past decade especially in the health research field.1-4 This development ties in with the growth in inter-disciplinary and multi-disciplinary research. Many grant applications, PhD project and the resulting papers especially in the health field apply a mixed-methods approach, where in the past a single approach would have dominated.   This interest in combining methods seems to be the case even in the more traditional quantitative field of clinical effectiveness and randomised controlled trials. Whilst I find this development encouraging as a mixed-methods social scientist, it also makes me wonder whether the applicants putting forward a mixed-methods project have thought about the disadvantages or at least the opportunity costs of using such approach.

A mixed-methods approach is ‘simply’ combining two or more research methods to address a research question, i.e. what the label suggests. It is often perceived as the combining of qualitative with quantitative methods, but it can technically also be a mix of quantitative methods or a combination of qualitative methods. The advantage of a mixed-methods approach is that the different methods in the mix address different aspects of the research question and that combining these methods offers a synergetic effect. So what are the possible limitations of or barriers to mixed-methods research?

First, using a mixed-methods approach means you need an understanding of two different philosophies and how to bring the findings of these two different methods together.4-6   One requires expertise in two different research approaches, either as individual or in the team as well as someone who can do the combining of the findings. For the latter you really need someone in the team who understand the pragmatic approach commonly used in mixed-methods approaches. Otherwise there is a great risk that the original mixed-methods study will be analysed and reported as two or more separate papers each based on data from one of the methods applied in the mixed-methods study.

Secondly, you can spend your money only once, hence there are opportunity costs. Thus if the maximum grant is £200,000 or £300,000 you can’t spend the full amount on the designing a large-scale quantitative study/survey, as you need to spend a proportion of your money and your attention and time on your qualitative study.

Thirdly, and related the above, both quantitative and qualitative methods have ‘rules’ about sampling and sample-size.5 Just because you have two methods this does not mean you can necessarily do a study with a smaller sample. The sample size calculations will still say you need at least xxx participants. Similarly, although perhaps not so rigidly you need a certain number of interviews or focus groups to do you qualitative study appropriately.

Fourthly, a common mistake seems to be to add a bit of qualitative research to a larger quantitative study, perhaps a bit tokenistic.7 Often it is so obvious in a grant application that the qualitative research is an add-on, an afterthought perhaps from a reviewer in the previous failed grant application.

Finally, not all mixed-methods studies are the same, in fact each mixed-methods study is more or less unique in the way in the way it mixes and matched individual research methods.3 So although mixed-methods may be the best way to address a particular research question, your particular proposed mixed of quantitative and qualitative research might not be the most appropriate to answer the overall research question.8

As with all research methods and research proposals my recommendation is if in doubt go and find an expert for advice.6 If necessary get an expert on your team of researchers to strengthen your application.

 

Professor Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

References:

  1.  Barbour, R.S. (1999) The case of combining qualitative and quantitative approaches in health services research. Journal of Health Services Research Policy, 4(1): 39-43.
  2. Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Wasti, S.P., Sathian, B. (2014) Mixed-methods approaches in health research in Nepal, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 4(5): 415-416.
  3. Plano Clark, V.L., Anderson, N., Wertz, J.A., Zhou, Y., Schumacher, K., Miaskowski, C. (2015) Conceptualizing Longitudinal Mixed Methods Designs: A Methodological Review of Health Sciences Research, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9: 297-319.
  4. MacKenzie Bryers, H., van Teijlingen, E. Pitchforth, E. (2014) Advocating mixed-methods approaches in health research, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 4(5): 417-422. http://www.nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/article/view/12018/9768
  5. Bryman, A. (1988) Quality and Quantity in Social Research, London: Routledge
  6. Bazeley, P. (2003) Teaching mixed methods. Qualitative Research Journal, 4: 117-126.
  7. Maxwell, J.A. (2016) Expanding the History and Range of Mixed Methods Research, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10: 12-27.
  8. Brannen, J. (2005) Mixing methods: The entry of qualitative & quantitative approaches into the research process. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 8(3): 173-85.

 

Live Migration of Virtual Machines to the Cloud and its associated issues

PG research

We would like to invite you to the latest research seminar of the Creative Technology Research Centre.LiveMigration

 

Speaker: Ibrahim Mansour

 

Title:   Live Migration of Virtual Machines to the Cloud and its associated issues

 

Time: 2:00PM-3:00PM

Date: Wednesday 6th January 2016

Room: P302 LT, Poole House, Talbot Campus

 

Abstract: Cloud computing provides users the ability to access shared, online computing resources. However, providers often offer their own proprietary applications, interfaces, APIs and infrastructures, resulting in a heterogeneous cloud environment. This heterogeneous environment makes it difficult for users to change cloud service providers; exploring capabilities to support the automated migration from one provider to another is an active, open research area. Many standards bodies (IEEE, NIST, DMTF and SNIA), industry (middleware) and academia have been pursuing approaches to reduce the impact of vendor lock-in by investigating the cloud migration problem at the level of the VM. However, the migration downtime, decoupling VM from underlying systems and security of live channels remain open issues. This talk focuses on analysing recently proposed live, cloud migration approaches for VMs at the infrastructure level in the cloud architecture.   The talk will highlight issues with flexibility, performance, and security of the approaches, including additional loads to the CPU and disk I/O drivers of the physical machine where the VM initially resides. Finally, the talk will introduce how a new approach, LibZam (Libya Zamzem) will be developed. LibZam is a tangible system that will work towards addressing the identified limitations.

 

We hope to see you there.

 

Congratulations to Dr. Caroline Ellis-Hill

NIHRDr. Caroline Ellis-Hill  has just been accepted as a qualitative methodologist on the NIHR (National Institute for Health Research) panel for Programme Grants for Applied Research (PGfAR).  Caroline from the Centre for Qualitative Research (CQR) in FHSS is the second BU academic to join a NIHR panel this year.  Earlier this year Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen was invited to be a member of the NIHR’s HTA Clinical Evaluation & Trials Board ( http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hta/our-people ).

Congratulations!

Professors Vanora Hundley & Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

HSS Writing Week 4th-8th January – How can Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit support you?

writing

bucru identity

The Faculty of Health and Social Sciences is holding a Writing Week between 4th-8th January 2016 aimed at supporting staff to find time in their busy academic diaries to prioritise writing grant applications and papers for publication.

The Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit offers methodological and statistical collaboration for all healthcare researchers in the area. It supports researchers in improving the quality, quantity and efficiency of research across Bournemouth University and local National Health Service (NHS) Trusts. It incorporates the Dorset office of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Research Design Service who offer free methodological support to researchers who are developing research ideas in the field of health and social care.

BUCRU will be supporting Writing Week in HSS by holding two drop-in sessions on Tuesday 5th January and Thursday 7th January 12-2pm in R508 Royal London House. We would also like to extend the invitation across the other Faculties for anyone who feels we may be able to support them. For those unable to attend the drop-in sessions, we would be delighted to arrange an alternative appointment.

Please see further information here, contact our adminstrator Louise Ward on 01202 961939 / bucru@bournemouth.ac.uk or visit our website. We look forward to seeing you!

Congratulations to FHSS staff on latest KPI publication

Knowledge Exchange, Knowledge Transfer, Publishing

Five RiversCongratulations to FHSS Celia Beckett and Jaqui Hewitt-Taylor and colleagues Richard Cross and Pam McConnell based at Five Rivers Child Care, Salisbury. Their first paper describes the exciting process of a Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) project between BU and Five Rivers Child Care which started in 2012 and finished recently in 2015.[1]    The project was established to develop a stepped assessment package that would help to identify the emotional and behavioural needs of children who are looked after to ensure the right services are accessed and to monitor their progress.

 

Congratulations,

Professor Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

Reference:

  1. Celia Beckett , Richard Cross , Jaqui Hewitt-Taylor , Pam McConnell (2015) Developing a process for assessment of the emotional and behavioural needs of “looked after” children: the Five Rivers model Journal of Children’s Services, 10(4):  324-38.

Creative Europe -measuring the creative industries of Europe

international

Euro_FlagThe origins of the EU – a coal and steel free trade agreement – lie elsewhere; however Europe’s creative industries are likely to be an increasingly important part of its economic future. Creative industries provide jobs that are highly skilled and more resistant to automation, jobs that are therefore more likely to be sustainable. [1] Understanding them is therefore of strategic importance.

A challenge in thinking about creative industries at a European level has been the absence of comparable statistics across the countries of the EU. Nesta’s report by Max Nathan, Andy Pratt and Ana Rincon-Aznar, published today, helps address this by providing consistent estimates of employment in the creative industries of the EU’s 28 member states and, where data has allowed, the wider ‘creative economies’ of 20 member states (the ‘creative economy’ consists of jobs inside the creative industries and creative jobs in other industries, for example a designer working for a car manufacturer).

For more information on this report click here.

If this is the type of information you would find interesting why not sign up to receive updates into your inbox from Nesta

What will Marty McFly need in 25 years? 

BU Challenges, Funding opportunities, Research themes, Training

Or, to put it another way, how do we realise the transformational impact of digital technologies on aspects of community life, cultural experiences, future society and the economy’?

On 26th and 27th January 2016,  RKEO will be hosting a sandpit workshop to facilitate exploration of this topic to:

  • Raise awareness –  interdisciplinary approaches are an integral element of research successclock
  • Provide a space to explore ideas
  • Provide a mechanism for continual peer review
  • Support proposal development
  • Stimulate research proposals in promising areas of research for the University

The Research Sandpit process comprises:

  • Defining the scope of the issue
  • Sharing understanding of the problem domain, and the expertise brought by the participants to the sandpit
  • Taking part in break-out sessions focused on the problem domain, using creative and innovative thinking techniques
  • Capturing the outputs in the form of a research project

To take part in this exciting opportunity, BU academic staff should complete the Sandpit Application Form and return this to Dianne Goodman by Tuesday 5th January. Places are strictly limited.

By applying, you agree to attend for the full duration of the event – full day 26th January and half day 27th January.

This event is part of BU’s Interdisciplinary Research Week.

Cross-platform production in digital media – up to £4m available

Business Engagement, innovation, Knowledge Exchange

theme - creative-digital
Innovate UK is to invest up to £4 million in collaborative R&D projects that stimulate innovation in the UK’s creative industries.
This competition aims to support projects that address convergence in digital media technologies. It covers film, television, online video, animation and video games, and includes pre- production, production and post- production processes, particularly for visual effects technologies.
Projects must be collaborative and led by a business. We expect to fund mainly industrial research projects. Small businesses could receive up to 70% of their eligible project costs, medium- sized businesses 60% and large businesses 50%.
We expect projects to range in size from total costs of £300,000 to £750,000, although we may consider projects outside this range.
The call is currently open , with registration closing on 23 December 2015 . The deadline for expressions of interest is at noon on 6 January 2016.

For more information on this call click here.

Contact a member of the funding development team if you have any questions .

New joint AECC and FHSS publication

PG research, Publishing

journal 2015

Congratulations to Joyce Miller, Monica Beharie and Elisabeth Simmenes based at the Anglo-European College of Chiropractic (AECC) and FHSS’s Alison Taylor and Sue Way who just had their paper ‘Parent reports of exclusive breastfeeding after attending a combined midwifery and chiropractic feeding clinic in the UK: A cross sectional service evaluation’ accepted in the journal Journal of Evidence-Based Complementary & Alternative Medicine.

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

 

Bournemouth Academic invited to present at Developing Social Data Science Methodologies workshop within the Alan Turing Institute

Katarzyna Musial-Gabrys was invited to present her work on complex social networks during the upcoming workshop organised by the Alan Turing Institute within the Foundation of Social Data Science initiative.tag_claud_2011

The Alan Turing Institute was established in 2015 as the UK national institute for the data sciences in response to a letter from the Council for Science and Technology (CST) to the UK Prime Minister (7 June 2013), describing the “Age of Algorithms”. The letter presents a case that “The Government, working with the universities and industry, should create a National Centre to promote advanced research and translational work in algorithms and the application of data science.” (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-age-of-algorithms).
Katarzyna’s presentation will contribute to shaping the portfolio of research challenges to be addressed within the Alan Turing Institute.

Title of Katarzyna’s talk: Methodological challenges in data aggregation in complex social networks.

Abstract of the talk:
For the first time in history, we have the possibility to process ‘big data’ (gathered in computer systems) about the interactions and activities of millions of individuals. It represents an increasingly important yet underutilized resource because due to the scale, complexity and dynamics, social networks extracted from this data are extremely difficult to analyse. There is no coherent and comprehensive methodological approach to analyse such networks which is crucial to advance our understanding of continuously changing people’s behaviour.
One of the methodological challenges is to cope with the variety of available big social data. This data comes from multiple systems (email, instant messengers, blogs, social networking sites, google searches, YouTube, etc.); in each system user can have one or more accounts; this data describes different types of activities (commenting, sharing, messaging, calling, etc.) and relationships (direct, quasi-direct and indirect). In order to be able to effectively process gathered data using data science approaches we need to develop new methodology that will focus on the multirelational (more than one type of connections in a network) character of data.
In general, there are two methods to do that: (i) analyse each relation type separately and then combine results from different layers or (ii) merge all relation types in one layer and analyse this newly created layer. Both approaches require effort in terms of redefining existing network analysis techniques. Analysing each network separately means that methods for combining results from different layers need to be developed. Merging some/all connection types into one heterogeneous relation means that a new approach for aggregation of data from different layers is required. Only by developing rigid approaches to data aggregation, the analytics task can be performed.

If you are interested and you would like to get some further information please contact kmusialgabrys@bournemouth.ac.uk.

Latest co-creation paper hot off the press! Study investigated the mechanism of spinal manipulation.

open access, PG research, Publishing, Research themes

Does cervical lordosis change after spinal manipulation for non-specific neck pain? A prospective cohort study

C-spine QF image for Chiro and Man Therapies

The mechanism for spinal manipulation in the treatment of pain is unknown. One mechanism proposed in the literature is that neck pain might be alleviated by changing or ‘correcting’ the alignment of the cervical spine (normal is considered to be a lordosis or lordotic curve – curving in towards the body). We decided to put this idea to the test in an undergraduate student project at AECC. Mike Shilton, a third year chiropractic student at the time, measured the angle of the cervical spine on x-ray images taken of patients and healthy volunteers that I had recruited for my PhD research. In that research, briefly, patients received spinal manipulation over 4 weeks, while healthy volunteers did not. Both groups had motion x-rays taken at baseline and 4-week follow-up. By using the first static image of each motion sequence we were able to investigate whether the cervical spine alignment or lordosis changed in the patient group, and whether such changes were greater than that in the healthy group not receiving treatment.

For the statistical analysis Mike was assisted by another student, Bas Penning de Vries. After the study it was proposed to the two students, by me and Professor Alan Breen, that they have a go at writing up the study for publication, with our assistance of course. Happily, they decided to do so. It might have been at times a painful process for them (most worthwhile things seem to be!), but they persevered and now it is published in a peer-reviewed open access journal! A great achievement for them, a publication already as they begin their clinical careers.

This co-created paper was a valuable exercise for the two undergraduate students, getting to learn about the research process, statistical analysis, publication and dissemination. An obvious benefit of co-creation to academics is that the workload of a project is spread throughout a larger team, albeit the students require support -but the time invested in that support should pay off. For instance, Mike and Bas  brought a fresh perspective to the team, posing well considered questions and suggestions that could be taken on board to improve the robustness of my own work and lines of argument. And of course, we now have a publication that would have taken much longer to get to press had I not had their assistance in writing it. In other words, with co-creation, everyone stands to gain.

Dr Jonny Branney

Report on the Millennium Cohort Study (MCS) Age 17 Survey: Consultative Conference

Funding opportunities

I recently attended the Millennium Cohort Study (MCS7) Age 17 Survey: Consultative one day conference held at UCL’s Institute of Education in London. Cohort studies are extremely valuable because data is collected over time working with the same sample of people. Longitudinal studies permit to describe the natural history of the same population and can identify risk factors for example, for optimal health, educational attainment chances and/or employment opportunities. Professor Emla Fitzsimons is the Principal Investigator of MCS,m strategically invited leaders of the ‘Activities and Daily Life’, ‘Cognitive Development’, and the ‘Socio-Emotional Development’ to harness conference delegates’ view on what are the important and key issues that society should know when examining 17 year old adolescents’ lives. The leaders provided an overview of their current strategies for capturing participants’ unique style of life. Then through a series of workshops the pros and cons of these were discussed and summarised. I don’t envy their jobs! To study the individual characteristics and the associated environmental factors in such a large sample is a huge undertaking. The attendees were from very varied inter- and multi-disciplinary backgrounds working at a wide range of organisations, including government agencies. The common objective was to create a dataset that can inform many governmental policies on a variety of topics. The process of decision making over every aspects of the 7th sweep of the MCS is extremely complex. The key aspect of longitudinal studies is comparability. Although, each sweep is unique because of the cohort is ageing, there has to be a trend of using the same methodology overtime. Studies like the MCS are facing constant funding crises because they are very expensive to run. There is an ongoing revision of time taken to collect data, finding proxy to gold standard measures and considering cutting expensive data collection methods like, FMRI scans, use of accelerometers to assess physical activity patterns and conducting physical tests. Despite all of these difficulties, data from such studies are invaluable. For example, in the 7th sweep they want to omit interviewing parents about their child’s mental health. I argued to include this data at this sweep, as most adolescents in the study are still living at home and others (like family members) are the ones most likely to identify early signs of mental health problems. Early detection is vital, especially when 1 in 10 adolescents known to develop at least one serious depressive episode in the UK by the time they are 18. Check out the MCS website if you are interested. You can also access all speakers’ slides by following the link (http://www.cls.ioe.ac.uk/Conference.aspx?itemid=4285&itemTitle=MCS+Consultative+Conference&sitesectionid=28&sitesectiontitle=Events). Data from the previous 6 sweeps are available for researchers to interrogate.

FMC Research Seminar: Adapting to dominant news narratives: tax ‘fairness’ as a Trojan horse for anti-austerity politics: Wednesday, 9 December, 3-4pm, Room W240

FMC Cross-Departmental Seminar Series 2015-16

Time: Wednesday, 9th December, 3-4 pm

Venue: The Screening Room W240, Weymouth House, Talbot Campus. 

Adapting to dominant news narratives: tax ‘fairness’ as a Trojan horse for anti-austerity politics

Over the past five years the issue of tax avoidance has broken through into mainstream news media and public debate, after many years in which the campaigning efforts of NGOs, trade unions and a few investigative journalists were met largely with indifference.  Protest group UK Uncut have been widely credited with increasing public engagement in the issue.  News routines are less reliant on official and elite sources than in the past, and protesters less universally delegitimised in dominant news discourse, but the political claims of social movements still tend to be neglected or reduced to vague or naive opposition.  UK Uncut were conscious of the common pitfalls and attempted to fit their own framing of the issue into existing news frames.  In presenting a practical alternative to cuts, they hoped to substantiate an argument against the broadly accepted ‘necessity’ of public spending cuts, smuggling an oppositional claim inside a familiar narrative.

Their framing of the issue in terms of compromised political interests and ‘fairness to taxpayers’ fitted with dominant news narratives and was widely adopted by other sources, including the Public Accounts Committee, and by journalists, but generally in terms of individual and organisational wrongdoing and self-interest rather as a systemic critique.  This did little to challenge or disrupt the overarching dominant narrative of fiscal crisis, necessary cuts, and even of fair tax as low tax.  However, the playful performativity of the protests themselves – although part of an activist repertoire, risking distancing themselves from the mainstream – were successful in achieving some limited press coverage of the cuts that they claimed could be prevented by corporations paying their ‘fair share’, but those arguments were not picked up by other voices.

This paper analyses the extent to which this ‘adaptation’ approach to news framing (Rucht 2013) or intervention in dominant narratives (Hirschkop 1998) was successful in advancing political claims and objectives, and whether this case supports the contention that strategically performative and rhetorical interventions in the public sphere can compensate for marginality and lack of discursive power.

Jen Birks is an Assistant Professor in the department of Culture, Film and Media at the University of Nottingham, where she teaches political communication and public cultures.  She is the author of News and Civil Society (Ashgate 2014).

All are welcome!!

About the series

This new seminar series showcases current research across different disciplines and approaches within the Faculty of Media and Communication at BU. The research seminars include invited speakers in the fields of journalism, politics, narrative studies, media, communication and marketing studies.  The aim is to celebrate the diversity of research across departments in the faculty and also generate dialogue and discussion between those areas of research.

 

Contributions include speakers on behalf of 

The Centre for Politics and Media Research

The Centre for the Study of Journalism, Culture and Community

Narrative Research Group

Journalism Research Group

Advances in Media Management Research Group

Emerging Consumer Cultures Research Group

Public Relations Research Group

CEMP awarded EU COST Action Grant

Awarded & submitted bids, international

cemp10

CEMP’s Marketa Zezulkova has been awarded a COST “Short-Term Scientific Mission” grant to conduct field media literacy research with 4-7 year old disadvantaged children in the Czech Republic and to establish a Child Research and Impact Group (CRAIG) with Charles University, Prague.  Together with a ‘Mapping Media Literacy in the Czech Republic’ grant Marketa was also awarded recently, this new project further establishes CEMP’s partnership with CU, following the Media Education Summit in Prague last year.

Tags: