Category / PG research

This part of the blog features news and information for postgraduate research students and supervisors

Publishing systematic and scoping reviews to improve your research profile

With the forthcoming REF 2021 in mind we would like to encourage both staff and postgraduate students to consider writing up their literature reviews as journal articles. Systematic and scoping reviews are a great way of publishing quality publications. They are highly valued as REF submissions, especially, but not only, in the health field.

There is plenty of support at Bournemouth University: from academic colleagues, with vast experience in writing reviews, to the library team, who can advise on, for example, developing your systematic search strategy and which databases to search.

 

You can start with publishing your review question and research strategy on PROSPERO, international prospective register of systematic reviews. We would like to highlight just one BU example in the field of the social sciences.  FHSS PhD student Orlanda Harvey published her proposed review ‘Support for people who use anabolic androgenic steroids: an investigation into what they want and what they currently access’ late last year on PROSPERO [1].

You might like to have a look at reviews published by Bournemouth University staff, which can be found by searching BURO, our institutional repository of research outputs. Moreover, BU academics have published several methods papers on the doing and writing systematic reviews [2-4].

 

Information about searching the literature for systematic reviews is available on this guide by the library team.

 

Other pages with useful information include:

 

Hopefully we have encouraged you to think about publishing your literature reviews as separate articles, and to seek help early in that process!

 

José López Blanco & Edwin van Teijlingen

 

 

For further information, please contact:

José López Blanco, Faculty Librarian (Health and Social Sciences), Library & Learning Support, Academic Services at tel 67350 or email:  hsslibteam@bournemouth.ac.uk

 

References:

  1. Harvey, O., Parrish, M., van Teijlingen, E., Keen., S. (2017) Support for people who use anabolic androgenic steroids: an investigation into what they want and what they currently access. PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017075199 Available from: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017075199
  2. van Teijlingen E., Napper, M., Bruce, J., Ireland. J. (2006) Systematic reviews in midwifery, RCM Midwives Journal 9(5): 186-188.
  3. van Teijlingen, ER, Simkhada, B., Ireland J., Simkhada P., Bruce J. (2012) Evidence-based health care in Nepal: The importance of systematic reviews, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 1(4): 114-118.
  4. Stewart, F., Fraser, C., Robertson, C., Avenell, A., Archibald, D., Douglas, F., Hoddinott, P., van Teijlingen, E., Boyers, D. (2014) Are men difficult to find? Identifying male-specific studies in MEDLINE and Embase, Systematics Reviews 3,78.

CQR “Go Create!” Lunchtime Seminars 2018-19

The Centre will be hosting a number of lunchtime ‘Go Create!’ seminars for the 2018/19 academic year, all from 1pm to 2pm in Royal London House.

Wednesday 3 October – ‘Creative ways of dissemination and data gathering’, presented bY Liz Norton, Caroline Ellis-Hill and Ann Hemingway, R201

Wednesday 7 November – ‘Creating and sharing stories: Students creation of digital stories in undergraduate midwifery education’, presented by Jan Leamon, R409

Wednesday 5 December – ‘Creative Writing for Academics Mini-session’, presented by Kip Jones, R409

Wednesday 9 January – ‘Expressing research findings with an artist’, presented by Kathleen Vandenberghe, R409

Wednesday 6 February – ‘Exploring self-ageing through participatory drawing’, presented by Curie Scott, R201

Wednesday 6 March – ‘Dead Poets, Live Teachers: Using films to explore the emerging professional identities of trainee teachers’, presented by Mark Readman, R201

    R

Introduction to Good Clinical Practice – 10th October

Are you interested in running your own research project within the NHS? Good Clinical Practice, or ‘GCP’, is a requirement for those wishing to work on clinical research projects in a healthcare setting.

GCP is the international ethical, scientific and practical standard to which all clinical research is conducted. By undertaking GCP, you’re able to demonstrate the rights, safety and wellbeing of your research participants are protected, and that the data collected are reliable.

The next GCP full day session is scheduled for Wednesday 10th October, at Dorset County Hospital, Dorchester – 8:45am – 4:30pm.

The day will comprise of the following sessions:

  • Introduction to research and the GCP standards;
  • Preparing to deliver your study;
  • Identifying and recruiting participants – eligibility and informed consent;
  • Data collection and ongoing study delivery;
  • Safety reporting;
  • Study closure.

If you’re interested in booking a place, please contact Research Ethics.
Remember that support is on offer at BU if you are thinking of introducing your research ideas into the NHS – email the Research Ethics mailbox, and take a look at the Clinical Governance blog.

Postgraduate Researchers – Welcome to the Doctoral College: Researcher Development Programme 2018-19

The Researcher Development Programme (RDP) offers over 150 workshops, online modules, online resources and an interactive webinar series specifically for postgraduate researchers professional, personal and research development.

The RDP offers the flexibility to meet individual development needs and long-term career development whilst at BU. The programme aims to ensure that postgradaute researchers are fully equipped with the skills and knowledge required to complete their research degree and make a successful transition into their future career, whether in academia or beyond.

Full programme details can be found in the brochure

A quick step user guide on how to use Brightspace and how to book onto workshops can be found here.

If you are a postgraduate researcher or supervisors and have any questions please contact your Research Skills and Development Officers Natalie and Clare on pgrskillsdevelopment@bournemouth.ac.uk

CQR Lunchtime Conversations Kick Off 3rd Oct at 1 pm RLH 201

The engaging CQR lunchtime Go Create!

seminar series for 2018-19 begins with

Liz Norton, Caroline Ellis-Hill &

Ann Hemingway

“Creative ways of data gathering &

dissemination”

Oct 3rd 1-2 pm RLH 201

Come prepared for informal conversation, sharing, and audience participation!

“We will be VERY informal!”

See you there!

R

Opportunity to Develop Bidding Skills

Mentoring relationships can take time to forge. We offer an opportunity to cultivate your expertise in developing research bids by joining a specific bidding team from the outset of its project.

Are you interested in learning more about how to go about applying for research funding, particularly larger Research Council bids? Would you like to gain experience by joining us in the process of developing, writing and submitting a large bid to the AHRC?

Are you intrigued by concepts such as student co-creation, generational issues and concerns, the use of media in learning and dissemination, social work, social psychology and narrative methods—all with teens?

We are looking for one or two academics with an interest in not only developing their expertise in grant writing, but also participating in a research and dissemination project involving Generation Z youth.  Working with experts with success in writing large grant proposals, you will engage in the process, from the very beginning through submission. You also will have the opportunity to develop a role that you might play in the project itself, when successful. Win-win, in other words.

Please see the outline article in the AHRC blog for more information on the proposed project. https://ahrc-blog.com/2018/04/09/how-ahrc-funded-film-rufus-stone-inspired-a-project-on-the-next-generation/

The team (so far) includes:

Kip Jones Qualitative Research and Performative Social Sci FHSS & FMC

Trevor Hearing Studio media production FMC

Lee-Ann Fenge Social Work and creative participation in research HSS

Michelle Cannon Senior Teaching Fellow in Media Arts Education UCL

Helen Walsh Dorset Space Youth Project CEO

Alexandra Pekalski and Eva Papadopoulou RKEO, BU

If this offer of mentorship in grant proposal writing seems interesting to you, please contact Kip Jones for an informal discussion. mailto:kipworld@gmail.com

Skam”, the Norwegian TV series about Oslo teenagers, has influenced our concept and will be used to engage local youth in telling their own stories.

New paper by recent BU Sociology graduate

Dr. Andrew Harding and his BU PhD supervisors just published a new paper from his Ph.D. research [1].   This interesting paper ‘Suppy-side review of the UK specialist housing market and why it is failing older people’ reviews the supply-side of policies and practices that impact on the shortage of supply in the contemporary specialist housing market for older people in the UK.  Andrew is currently based at Lancaster University.

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

Reference:

  1. Harding, Andrew, Parker, Jonathan, Hean, Sarah & Hemingway, Ann (2018) Supply-side review of the UK specialist housing market and why it is failing older people. Housing, Care and Support

 

New BU publication on maternity care & culture in Afghanistan

Congratulations to Dr. Rachel Arnold on the acceptance by Social Science & Medicine (published by Elsevier) of the second paper based on her PhD on maternity care in Afghanistan [1].  This interesting ethnography explores the experiences, motivations and constraints of healthcare providers in a large public Afghan maternity hospital. Arnold and colleagues identify barriers and facilitators in the delivery of care. Under the surface of this maternity hospital, social norms were in conflict with the principles of biomedicine. Contested areas included the control of knowledge, equity and the primary goal of work. The institutional culture was further complicated by pressure from powerful elites. These unseen values and pressures explain much of the disconnection between policy and implementation, education and the everyday behaviours of healthcare providers.

Improving the quality of care and equity in Afghan public maternity hospitals will require political will from all stakeholders to acknowledge these issues and find culturally attuned ways to address them.  The authors argue that this notion of parallel and competing world-views on healthcare has relevance beyond Afghanistan.   The paper co-authored by (a) Prof. Kath Ryan, Professor of Social Pharmacy at the University of Reading and Visiting Professor in FHSS, and BU’s Professors Immy Holloway and Edwin van Teijlingen.

 

References:

  1. Arnold, R., van Teijlingen, E., Ryan, K., Holloway, I. (2018) Parallel worlds: An ethnography of care in an Afghan maternity hospital, Social Science & Medicine 126:33-40. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.09.010.

 

NIHR and World Health Organisation joint statement – have your say!

There is an increasing emphasis on the need for researchers and sponsors to publish, and disseminate, the results of the clinical studies that they conduct. Timely disclosure of results is important ethically, morally, in the interests of research integrity and from a waste reduction perspective.
Dissemination of results, whether favourable or not, also achieves transparency – increasingly important from the perspective of the recent introduction of the GDPR.

The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) have signed-up to the WHO’s joint statement on public disclosure of results from clinical trials. The policy sets out the expectations and support on offer in order for research communities to comply. The draft policy is available to read, with a quick survey open until 21st September, for you to have your say.

BU has access to the ClinicalTrials.gov system – get in touch for access and for the opportunity to register your study and results in the public domain.

Dr Gavin or: how I stopped worrying and learned to love research

A lesson on patience

It apparently took J.D. Salinger 10 years to write his first novel, The Catcher in the Rye. J.K. Rowling spent about 6 years writing and re-writing Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone (I suspect publisher pressure accelerated things thereafter). As an early career researcher, I feel that since graduating from my doctorate and becoming independent, I can be less patient and eager for instant results – a feeling encouraged by social media and continuous metricisation.

My own current project, inspiratory muscle training for care home residents at risk of falling, can’t be compared to great achievements like those novels. But it is my ambition to undertake my own research project as principal investigator – and so I intend to savour the experience (i.e. be task oriented), rather than just chasing the outputs (i.e. being outcome oriented). I have learned to value iterative research designs, in that, the initial study’s outcomes inform the subsequent study’s methodology, and so on. However, this method presents its own uncertainties, as the researcher has to relinquish their control over the study.

Several lessons on managing myself

That said, I am beginning to see the need to set regular targets to keep the momentum on a project like this going. Taking my research beyond the controlled ‘safety’ of the physiology laboratory (satisfying internal validity), into a brave new world of the care home setting (satisfying external validity), requires working with research ‘end users’, be it: service managers, staff or residents. I’m finding the process: i) slow, care providers have additional administrative requirements, ii) essential, in laying trusted foundations for a long-term project, and iii) rewarding, by implementing research into the real world and establishing impact from the outset.

Since being awarded ACORN funding, my summer has been spent: writing for ethical approval, satisfying HR admin, recruiting care home partners, revising protocols, creating Plan B, writing Plan B ethical approval, piloting testing, revising participant selection criteria, and being trained by my PhD student (a lesson in humility, if nothing else). Even supported by an industrious research assistant this has felt a slow journey, with weekly peaks and troughs. I have even begun an 8 week period of inspiratory muscle training myself, to understand how care home residents can improve, feel challenged, and require further support. This has been equally useful to highlight practicalities – my challenges have been fitting 30 breaths, morning and night, into my daily routine; in contrast care residents’ challenges are likely to relate to effort, guidance, and motivation for training.

 

 

 

 

 

Research is an intellectual and logistical marathon

My initial participant selection criteria excluded all people with: dementia, COPD and respiratory difficulties, and cardiovascular diseases. My journey has presented three worries thus far: i) the funding expenditure deadline, ii) recruiting care homes and, iii) the selection criteria. In academia, the deadlines, targets and metrics are omnipresent, arguably more so since the increase in tuition fees.

Following the joy of being awarded research funding, comes the deadlines of expenditure (simple, if it were not for standard processes – ethical clearance, securing HR contracts, recruitment, and piloting) and the deliverables. I’m highly grateful of the ongoing support I receive, however I strongly believe that HE institutions must be realistic when financing projects and staff. Research is a slow process; outcomes cannot always be constrained to exact dates, as much as quality research cannot be established in rushed expenditure.

Mostly recently my challenge has been in recruiting care homes, particularly due to my selection criteria. This presents the methodological conflict between internal validity (i.e. the controlled laboratory) and external validity (i.e. the unpredictable care environment). Should I maintain my exclusion criteria, even though the majority of care home residents have dementia and/or COPD? Or relax the criteria to reflect the real environment and achieve recruitment? The former would make for more publishable data; the latter would support a Research Council funding bid (ah, I nearly forgot…must submit one of those by April 2019). Again, tempus fugit.

Self-experimentation

In this this social media age, time can appear condensed; two days can seem like an age, an afternoon of no replies, an epoch. A study in the 2017 Altmetric Top 100 provides compelling evidence that regular Smartphone use impairs cognitive performance by re-orienting attention. I’ve ‘disconnected’ from using a Smartphone and Facebook; this works for me. Regardless, I still have to exercise discipline in unnecessary email checking and now time-block my diary for: education, research or practice. I seriously recommend, as an academic, experiment on yourself. J.B.S. Haldane was a notable and prolific example of a self-experimenting physiologist. Yet whether it’s inspiratory muscle training or reducing Smartphone use, experiment on yourself – assess how you respond, identify influential variables and intervene if you wish.

 

 

 

 

How my ACORN grows

The simple truth is I don’t have a study finish date. The logic is if I am flexible on time, and put lots of my own effort in, then I will ultimately be able to generate both output and impact. There’s the psychological advantage too: by not having a finish date, I also stop the project becoming ‘work’. Pressures, missed opportunities, worrying others are publishing – these would stop research being fun. Academic success is not proportional to effort alone, however developing partnerships beyond academia is.

Being an academic is great – relative freedom, interesting colleagues, working with students, and contributing to societal value. Personally I’m not sure I’ll ever stop worrying, nevertheless, I have learnt to expect challenge on a near daily basis. This is notably relevant for the early career researcher looking to develop into an independent researcher, capable of sustaining their own work. Academia will always have a mountain to climb. I learnt to relax, stop worrying and love research by:

  1. Indulging in ‘quiet time’ – think, talk and share ideas
  2. Accepting failure
  3. Avoiding perfectionism
  4. Prioritising – day by day, week by week, time-block based on what tasks arise
  5. Avoiding distraction – e.g. social media detox / only read emails after late morning

Dr James Gavin

Dept. Sport & Physical Activity

Faculty of Management

Email jgavin@bournemouth.ac.uk

Phone 012029 66303

CQR starts the seminar year with a Round-up

The first CQR Seminar of the academic year will be a CQR members, assocs, and doc students Round-up! 

Wednesday, 12 Sept at 1 pm in RLH 409.

Nonetheless, those curious about CQR and how they might get involved are welcome to attend!

Agenda

  1. Brain-storming future Go Create! seminar ideas (We have the first half of the year covered, but need ideas and people for the second half.

  2. CQR and CEL are beginning a joint adventure!  We are developing an association with the Centre for Excellence in Learning, particularly around creativity.Come along and share your thoughts.

  3. Research Collaborations!  Many of you have ideas for projects, big and small, and just need that extra pair of hands (and creative input!) to make it happen. A chance to put your ideas forward, and see who might help make them happen!

  4. Any other business

Start the new academic year with camaraderie and conviviality.

We look forward to seeing lots of you at the Round-up 12 Sept.!

Updated HRA and HCRW Statement of Activities and Schedule of Events published

What is the significance of the Statement of Activities and Schedule of Events?

When the Health Research Authority (HRA) approval process was introduced in March 2016, the Statement of Activities (SoA) and Schedule of Events (SoE) documents were made mandatory for non-commercial studies – those initiated and managed by non-commercial organisations such as Universities, NHS Trusts, charities etc.
The two documents must be submitted alongside your study documents when seeking NHS Research Ethics Committee approval, and the approval of the HRA, as the ‘umbrella organisation’.

With the introduction of the new General Data Protection Regulations, the HRA and HCRW have amended the two documents. They may be found here.

Who is ‘HCRW’?

HCRW stands for Health and Care Research Wales, and they have recently aligned its processes and paperwork with the HRA’s, so as to streamline and make consistent the research application process within England and Wales. Until recently the HRA was the umbrella organisation in England only, and a separate process was required if you wished to include research sites in Wales, Scotland, and Ireland*.

*If you wish to include sites from Scotland and Ireland, then the ‘old process’ is still to be followed. Contact Research Ethics for guidance.

What do I need to do?

If you are currently awaiting your approvals from the REC and HRA/HCRW, you do not need to do anything unless otherwise instructed by the HRA/HCRW. If you are concerned please get in touch with your HRA assessor, or their queries line.

If you are simply thinking of introducing your research into the NHS, are at your beginning stages, or you are currently compiling your study documents, then please remember to use the new versions of the SoA and SoE.
Please get in touch with Research Ethics for guidance on any aspects of clinical research, guidance, and if not already obtained, to request sponsorship of your study. Guidance and useful documents may also be found on the Clinical Governance blog.

Doctoral College: Researcher Development programme

The Doctoral College would like to present the September monthly update. This September update brings the launch of the Researcher Development Programme for 2018-19. We would also like to highlight some Brightspace Researcher Development Programme training coming up for PGRs and Supervisors and we would like to open bookings for the highly successful pre-transfer/major review and post-transfer/major review inductions.

Also note that the brand new Doctoral College: Researcher Development Programme on Brightspace is now live. Workshop bookings, online resources and modules, plus much more are now accessible on this new platform. If you cannot access the platform, please get in touch.

Don’t forget to check out the Doctoral College Facebook page.

REGISTER NOW: 18th September 2018 – Sixth Annual Wessex CRN Research Meeting & Regional BGS

Click links for programme and registration form, spaces limited!

Programme for SIXTH Annual Wessex CRN and Regional BGS 18 Sept 2018 with sponsors v3

REGISTRATION FORM for 6th annual Wessex CRN Research BGS MEET

ING 18 09 2018

Writing About Methods- 3rd October 2018

Join Dr Patrick Brindle from INTO Content  on the 3rd October 2018 9:30-16:30 for Writing about Methods course. To book click here

The session will talk about a range of practical approaches they can adopt when writing about methodology in the social sciences. The course focuses on 20 or so writing strategies and thought experiments designed to provide more clarity and power to the often-difficult challenge of writing about methods. The course also looks at common mistakes and how to avoid them when writing about methods. The focus throughout is on building confidence and increasing our repertoire of writing strategies and skills.

The course covers:

  • A range of practical writing strategies for handling methodology
  • The challenges of writing a PhD methodology chapter or a methods section in a research paper
  • Writing for qualitative and quantitative research approaches
  • Understanding different audiences and the needs of different academic markets

By the end of the course participants will:

  • Better understand who and what ‘methodology writing’ is for
  • Know the differences and similarities between PhD methods chapters, research paper methods sections and methods books
  • Understand and reflect on 21 principles (or starting points) of best practice in methodology writing
  • Focus writing on audience needs and expectations
  • Be aware of common mistakes and misunderstandings and so avoid them
  • Reflect on the relationship between methodology writing and other parts of your manuscript
  • To develop learning and best practice through exercises and examples

This course would be suitable for PhD students, post-docs and junior researchers in the social sciences. To book click here