Category / Publishing

COVID-19 in Qatar

international, open access, Publishing, writing

Peer reviewing is the backbone of academic publishing. It is this peer review process to ensure that papers/publications have been vetted scientifically prior to publication by experts in the field, i.e. one’s peers. However, the process is not without its problems. One such problems is the delay in academic publishing. For example, a few days ago we published a substantive editorial on COVID-19 in Qater [1].  When we submitted this in July 2020 the information in our editorial was very up to date, and it still was when the Qatar Medical Journal accepted it on 26th July 2020.  Unfortunately, with all the incredibly rapid developments in vaccine development, approval and roll out some of the paper now reads like ‘historial data’.

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH)

 

Reference:

  1. van Teijlingen, E.R., Sathian, B., Simkhada, P., Banerjee, I. (2021) COVID-19 in Qatar: Ways forward in public health & treatment, Qatar Medical Journal 2020(38): 1-8 https://doi.org/10.5339/qmj.2020.38

First BU paper accepted for 2021

NHS, open access, Publishing, writing

Congratulations to Prof. Vanora Hundley whose article ‘Escalation triggers and expected responses in obstetric early warning systems used in UK consultant-led maternity units’ is now available Open Access online. The paper has been accepted in Resuscitation Plus. Co-authors include FHSS Visiting Faculty Prof. Gary Smith and Dr. Richard Isaacs.

The paper reports on a review of OEWS [Obstetric Early Warning Systems] charts and escalation policies across consultant-led maternity units in the UK (n = 147). OEWS charts were analysed for variation in the values of physiological parameters triggering different levels of clinical escalation. The observed variations in the trigger thresholds used in OEWS charts and the quality of information included within the accompanying escalation protocols is likely to lead to suboptimal detection and response to clinical deterioration during pregnancy and the post-partum period. The paper concludes the development of a national OEWS and escalation protocol would help to standardise care across obstetric units.

 

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

Midwifery and the Media

international, NHS, Publishing, writing

Today we received an end-of-year good-news message from ResearchGate telling us that 700 people had ‘read’ our book Midwifery, Childbirth and the Media [1].  Lee Wright, Senior Lecturer in the School of Nursing and Midwifery at Birmingham City University wrote in his review of our edited volume: “…our media image and digital foot print are rapidly becoming the most important window into our profession. In a rapidly changing environment this book provides an up to date and informative insight into how our profession is affected by the media and how our profession can inform and influence the image of midwifery. This area is going to become even more important in the future universities and trusts increasingly use broadcast and social media to manage information and inform our clients of the services we provide.  This book will be the important first text in a new growth area. It brings together an internationally recognised group of authors who are experts in this field. I wholeheartedly recommend it to you.”

This edited collection was published by Palgrave Macmillan in 2017 and it is part of a larger body of Bournemouth University research on the topic [2-6].

 

Professor Edwin van Teijlingen, Professor Vanora Hundley and Associate Professor Ann Luce

 

References:

  1. Luce, A., Hundley, V., van Teijlingen, E. (Eds.) (2017) Midwifery, Childbirth and the Media, London: Palgrave Macmillan [ISBN: 978-3-319-63512-5].
  2. Luce, A., Cash, M., Hundley, V., Cheyne, H., van Teijlingen, E., Angell, C. (2016) “Is it realistic?” the portrayal of pregnancy and childbirth in the media BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth 16: 40 http://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12884-016-0827-x
  3. Angell, C. (2017) An Everyday Trauma: How the Media Portrays Infant Feeding, In: Luce, A. et al. (Eds.) Midwifery, Childbirth and the Media, London: Palgrave Macmillan pp: 45-59.
  4. Hundley, V., Luce, A., van Teijlingen, E., Edlund, S. (2019) Changing the narrative around childbirth: whose responsibility is it? Evidence-based Midwifery 17(2): 47-52.
  5. Hundley, V., Duff, E., Dewberry, J., Luce, A., van Teijlingen, E. (2014) Fear in childbirth: are the media responsible? MIDIRS Midwifery Digest 24(4): 444-447.
  6. Hundley, V., Luce, A., van Teijlingen, E. (2015) Do midwives need to be more media savvy? MIDIRS Midwifery Digest 25(1):5-10.

New publication for the SAIL Project Team

Awarded & submitted bids, Publishing

Staying Active and Independent for Longer (SAIL) is an EU funded project which began in 2017. The project aimed to use the concept of social innovation to develop 10 pilots across 4 countries (France, Belgium, The Netherlands and the UK) that would enable older people to be more active. The members of the research team from Bournemouth University (Prof. Ann Hemingway Prof. Adele ladkin and Dr. Holly Crossen-White) have just published a paper in Quality in Ageing and Older Adults on how social innovation can be applied to develop services that support the needs of older people. The paper entitled, The application of social innovation as it relates to older people and the implications for future policymaking: a scoping review presents research evidence into the use of soical innovation in relation to services for older people and identifies exisitng knowledge gaps. A key point to emerge from the scoping review was that although social innovation has the potential to act as a policy driver, to be effective, it is necessary to devise robust strategies to ensure full user-engagement and active involvement of communities.  Furthermore,  any future research into social innovation needs to focus upon the process of delivery as this is an aspect of social innovation that has to date received little attention.

New interdisciplinary COVID-19 paper

international, open access, Publishing, writing

An evidence-based, multidisciplinary approach on risk zoning, personal and transmission risk assessment in near real-time, and risk communication would support the optimized decisions to minimize the impact of coronavirus on our lives. This interdisciplinary paper [1], pubished today in Scientific Reports, offers a framework to assess the individual and regional risk of COVID-19 along with risk communication tools and mechanisms. Relative risk scores on a scale of 100 represent the integrated risk of influential factors. The personal risk model incorporates age, exposure history, symptoms, local risk and existing health condition, whereas regional risk is computed through the actual cases of COVID-19, public health risk factors, socioeconomic condition of the region, and immigration statistics. A web application tool (http://www.covira.info) has been developed, where anyone can assess their risk and find the guided information links primarily for Nepal. This study provides regional risk for Nepal, but the framework is scalable across the world. 

The authors comprised researchers from the University of Bristol, Science Hub (Nepal), University of the West of England, Public Health Perspective Nepal, Nepal Open University, Center for Molecular Dynamics Nepal, Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust, the University of Huddersfield and Bournemouth University.

 

Reference:

  1. Parajuli, R.R., Mishra, B., Banstola, A. Multidisciplinary approach to COVID-19 risk communication: a framework and tool for individual and regional risk assessment. 21650 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-78779-0

Cutting-edge research has assessed the carbon footprint of BU during the COVID-19 lockdown

Publishing

As we have now all become accustomed to working and studying from home, research has started looking at various implications of remote work/study. These implications include the impact on our subjective being, but also on the environment. There are speculations that work/study from home may reduce our carbon footprint, for example. This is because commute and/or business travel are no longer required. These two activities have long been recognised as the main drivers of carbon emissions in Universities, alongside on-site energy use and procurement.

The COVID-19 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to compare the carbon intensity of working/studying at home and on campus. That is why Dr Viachaslau Filimonau from the Business School; Dave Archer, Laura Bellamy, Neil Smith, and Richard Wintrip from the Sustainability Team have undertaken a study of the carbon footprint of Bournemouth University during the COVID-19 lockdown. This is the first investigation of its kind and only the third attempt to assess the carbon emissions of UK institutions of higher education.

The study has found that working/studying from home may be less beneficial from the carbon perspective than originally thought. The carbon emissions produced by staff, but particularly students, at home are almost equal to the carbon footprint of commute. The complete closure of University campuses does not result in low carbon emissions.

This has important implications for the future of (higher) education in the UK and beyond. For instance, the study’s findings indicate that the model of blended teaching and learning may have low carbon efficiency and should, therefore, be applied by Universities with caution. This is because institutions of higher education should promote sustainability which involves ‘leading by example’ when it comes to reducing the carbon footprint.

The study has been peer-reviewed and published in Science of the Total Environment, a leading international journal in the field of sustainability and environmental management (impact factor 6.6). The full paper can be found here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969720374957. The team aims to advance this project by assessing the carbon footprint of Bournemouth University over the winter period. This is when heating will be put on, thus creating extra carbon emissions on campus but, particularly, at home given that we will continue working/studying remotely in semester two.

Cross-disciplinary approaches to prehistoric demography | Themed issue edited by BU staff

Publishing

We are pleased to announce the release of Cross-Disciplinary Approaches to Prehistoric Demography, a themed issue of The Royal Society Philosophical Transactions B series, compiled and edited by Philip Riris and Fabio Silva from the Department of Archaeology & Anthropology at BU, in collaboration with colleagues Jennifer C. French (University of Liverpool), Javier Fernandéz-López de Pablo (University of Alicante, Spain) and Sergi Lozano (University of Barcelona, Spain).

Demography impacts a wide range of aspects of human culture past and present: from our capacity to transmit genes and knowledge across generations, to the reach of our social networks and long-term impacts on the environment. Recent cross-disciplinary advances in the reconstruction and interpretation of prehistoric population histories (palaeodemography) have been transforming our understanding of past societies. This theme issue integrates the efforts of researchers working across archaeology, anthropology, genomics, palaeoecology, and evolutionary demography, combining original research alongside critical reviews, to provide a benchmark for the state-of-the-art in prehistoric demography and a statement of the future of this rapidly growing cross-disciplinary endeavour.

The themed issue, which includes an open-access manifesto for palaeodemography in the 21st century and several other open-access articles, can be found here.

A view across Caral, one of the earliest urban centres in the world and a key study site for research on prehistoric population history, such as reported in this theme issue. This site, 200km north of Lima in Peru, was inhabited roughly between the 29th and 19th centuries BC by the Norte Chico civilization. The mound seen in the centre is the “Edificio Piramidal la Cantera” (the Quarry Pyramidal Building) and the building in the left background is the “Edificio del Altar Circular” or Building of the Circular Altar. Image credit: Daniel Sandweiss.

A view across Caral, one of the earliest urban centres in the world and a key study site for research on prehistoric population history, such as reported in this theme issue. This site, 200km north of Lima in Peru, was inhabited roughly between the 29th and 19th centuries BC by the Norte Chico civilization. The mound seen in the centre is the “Edificio Piramidal la Cantera” (the Quarry Pyramidal Building) and the building in the left background is the “Edificio del Altar Circular” or Building of the Circular Altar. Image credit: Daniel Sandweiss.

‘Defying categorisation’

Publishing, writing

Donald Nordberg

During the other half of his time in semi-retirement, Donald Nordberg, Associate Professor in the Business School, is revisiting themes from his early university education in English and comparative literature. A first product has emerged: New Writing, a Routledge/Taylor & Francis journal, has accepted his paper “Category choice in creative writing“. Fiction is a uniquely flexible form of writing, he writes, but the publishing world wants to drop works of fiction into buckets, which often come in pairs. The paper examines three such dichotomies. Writing coaches want to know: Is the work plot-driven or character-driven? Publishers, booksellers and popular critics ask: Is it genre or literary? Academic analysis wonders: Is it philosophical or psychological?

     Using perspectives on heuristics and biases drawn from psychology and decision analysis, Nordberg examines similarities between these category pairs and shows how the distinctions blur, both in literary criticism and through empirical studies of reader responses. He suggests that by paying attention to the anchor-points in heuristics, writers can bend publishing imperatives and help works of fiction retain the ability to defy categorisation.

Midwifery education publication published today

Centre for Excellence in Learning, Fusion, NHS, Publishing, writing

Congratulations to Prof. Sue Way, Dr. Luisa Cescutti-Butler and Dr. Michelle Irving on the publication today of their latest article ‘A study to evaluate the introduction of the Newborn Infant Physical Examination knowledge and skills into an undergraduate pre-registration midwifery education programme’ [1].  This paper published in  Nurse Education Today  uses the principles of FUSION, bring together Education (undergraduate midwifery education), Practice (examination of the newborn) and Research (evaluation study).  This paper adds to the growing list of publication on aspects of midwifery education by academics in the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perintal Health (CMMPH).

 

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

Reference:

  1. Way, S., Cescutti-Butler, L., Irving, M. (2020) A study to evaluate the introduction of the Newborn Infant Physical Examination knowledge and skills into an undergraduate pre-registration midwifery education programme, Nurse Education Today, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104656.

 

Changes to JISC Wiley Open Access Agreement

open accecss, open access, Publishing

The Jisc-Wiley Read and Publish agreement transitions funds which previously paid for subscriptions to pay for OA publishing in Wiley’s hybrid and fully open access journals. Bournemouth University through agreement with JISC benefit from this agreement.

Due to high volume of articles which far exceeded original predictions modelled by JISC and Wiley, from 12 October, this agreement will be limited to OA publishing to Wellcome, UKRI, Blood Cancer UK, British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Parkinson’s UK and Versus Arthritis funded research only, to guarantee that all research funded will be published OA in 2020.

If you have further queries regarding this, please do get in touch with OpenAccess@bournemouth.ac.uk

 

OAPEN Open Access Books Toolkit Launched

Guidance, open access, Publishing, REF Subjects

The OAPEN Foundation (Online Library and Publication Platform) has launched a new open access (OA) books toolkit for researchers and academic book authors. The toolkit is a free-to-access, stakeholder-agnostic resource that aims to help authors better understand OA for books, increase trust in OA book publishing, provide reliable and easy-to-find answers to questions from authors, and to provide guidance on the process of publishing an OA book.

The toolkit was created in collaboration with Springer Nature and The University of Glasgow and has been written by a global and diverse group of stakeholders from the academic community and scholarly communications organisations.

You can access the toolkit here: www.oabooks-toolkit.org

To learn more about the toolkit or get involved, please contact Tom Mosterd, Community Manager at OAPEN: t.mosterd@oapen.org. You can also sign up to the toolkit newsletter: http://eepurl.com/g5fuFr.

COVID-19 affects research into other diseases

international, Publishing, Research Integritiy, Training, writing

A systematic review published late last week assesses the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on on-going and new clinical trials and research on a range of diseases [1]. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a series of public health policies, including lock down, that have crippled the healthcare systems of many countries. These measures hugely impact on study participants, care providers, researchers, trial sponsors, and research organizations conducting clinical trials. This pandemic has a substantial impact on the trial sites as they experience difficulty in the continuation of trial activities which eventually hampers the progress of the trial and delays study timelines. Most sites are struggling due to delayed subject enrolment, shortfalls in monitoring, and risks of compromised data integrity, and this situation also has a negative impact on the start of future. Researchers are also concerned regarding the delay or cancellations of trials in the pandemic, which will have financial consequences for research organizations/human resources.

According to one survey, about two-thirds of the respondents have stopped or will soon halt subject enrolment in ongoing clinical trials, one-third halted randomization, and fifty percent of respondents are delaying or planning to delay the studies.  Adopting new approaches and understanding the key risk indicators will help managers support trial sites with flexibility and ingenuity. For instance, switching patient site visits to new-trial virtualization, and telemedicine to interact with patients will help manage current clinical trials also beneficial for the post-pandemic era.

 

Reference:

  1. Sathian B, Asim M,  Banerjee I, Pizarro AB, Roy B, van Teijlingen ER, Borges do Nascimento IJ, Alhamad HK.  Impact of COVID-19 on clinical trials and clinical research: A systematic review. Nepal J Epidemiol. 2020;10(3); 878-887