BU Research Blog

9 July 2016

Presentation PhD student Jib Acharya in Liverpool

international, open access, PG research, Publishing, student research Edwin van Teijlingen

Mr. Jib Acharya (FHSS) gave an interesting presentation yesterday about the qualitative research findings of his PhD at Liverpool John Moores University. Jib’s PhD research focused on the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of poor women in Nepal about healthy eating and the study also identifies major food barriers.

His mixed-methods approach combines a quantitative questionnaire survey with qualitative research. Jib’s research project is supervised by Dr. Jane Murphy, Dr. Martin Hind and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen. Some of the preliminary findings of this FHSS thesis have already been published in two scientific journals [1-2].

References:

Acharya, J., van Teijlingen, E., Murphy, J., Hind, M. (2015) Assessment of knowledge, beliefs and attitudes towards healthy diet among mothers in Kaski, Nepal, Participation 17(16): 61-72.
Acharya, J., van Teijlingen, E., Murphy, J., Hind, M. (2015) Study of nutritional problems in preschool aged children in Kaski District in Nepal, Journal of Multidisciplinary Research in Healthcare 1(2): 97-118. http://dspace.chitkara.edu.in/jspui/bitstream/1/560/1/12007_JMRH_Acharya.

7 July 2016

The Springer Compact offset model: update on progress

open access, Publishing Pengpeng

Original post by Mafalda Picarra, JISC – https://scholarlycommunications.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2016/07/06/the-springer-compact-offset-model-update-on-progress/

In this blog post, Jisc Collections provides an update on how the Springer Compact agreement is progressing in the UK.

In March 2015, Jisc Collections announced that it had reached an agreement with Springer for an offset model to contain the costs of publication and subscription access for UK institutions. Six months have passed since the agreement launched in January 2016, with an additional 368 articles published free of charge in the pilot phase between October and December 2015.

The Springer Compact agreement is a flipped model which enables researchers from 91 participating UK institutions to publish their articles immediately as open access in ~1,600 Springer journals as well as to access all content published in ~2,500 Springer journals. In this flipped model, rather than paying a subscription fee and an unknown number of APC charges, the institution pays a set fee for unlimited APCs based on their 2014 APC expenditure with Springer and a top up fee to cover access to all the subscription content – thus containing the total cost of ownership.

This model moves away from the traditional historical print spend model aiming to reduce costand administration barriers to hybrid open access publishing and to increase open access. All UK articles published in eligible Springer Open Choice hybrid journals are made immediately open access upon publication and are automatically compliant with funder requirements.

Since January, 1259 articles have been published by authors from 92% of UK institutions participating in the agreement (Figure 1). In only five months (January to May), 86% of UK institutions have already published open access articles equivalent to or in excess of their total 2014 APC spend. This means that researchers from these institutions are publishing more OA articles than they did in 2014 but the cost to the institutions is capped. If we look at the pro-rata (Jan-May) of the total fee paid to Springer for this year (2014 APC spend and subscription top up fee), 23% of these institutions have already published open access articles to value of the total combined fee.

Figure 1 Articles published by month.

In addition, the number of articles published on open access through Springer’s hybrid journals has increased by 25% in the first five months of the agreement when compared to the total number of articles published in 2015 (Figure 2).

Figure 2 Articles published by UK authors in Springer hybrid journals in 2015 (subject to APC payment) and 2016 (under the Springer Compact deal).

The subject areas where more articles have been published include Medicine (22%), Biomedical and Life Sciences (18%), Education (9%), Earth and Environmental Science (7%), Chemistry and Materials Science (6.6%), Engineering (6.5%), and Mathematics and Statistics (5.8%) (Figure 3).

Figure 3 Articles published by subject.

Examples of journals with the highest number of publications include Diabetologia (26 articles), Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology (22 articles), Synthese (19 articles), Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders (17 articles), Psychopharmacology (17 articles), and The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology (17 articles) (Figure 4).

Figure 4 Journals with the highest number of publications.

The feedback received from libraries at Jisc’s offsetting workshops[1] suggests that this is a workable and efficient model that other publishers could adopt. The administration has been easier for institutions, for instance, by rationalising the eligibility, approval and payment processes which consequently saves staff time. Institutions have reported that it is relatively easy to determine eligibility and that there is no need for authors to consider different application processes or funding routes. This model is also seen as beneficial for institutions given the fact that there are no fixed limits on the number of articles that authors can publish and authors are not required to use a code or a voucher to pay for APCs.

The Springer Compact agreement also helps researchers to comply with funders and institutions open access mandates. It does so by enabling compliance with the key requirements stated in various research funders open access policies: articles are made immediately available on open access (no embargo periods apply), articles are made openly available under CC BY licences, and a copy of the final peer-reviewed manuscripts will be deposited in repositories via Jisc’s Publications Router.

Paul Ayris, Director of UCL Library Services, said: “The Springer Compact deal is an excellent new model that enables UK authors to achieve Gold open access at no additional cost. As well as the significant financial benefits, it simplifies administration for authors and institutions, and streamlines the process of complying with funders’ open access policies. UCL wholeheartedly supports this model, and hopes to see other publishers following suit.”

Veronika Spinka, Open Access Manager, Springer Nature, added: “Springer Compact is a workable model that reduces the manual effort and workload for authors and institutions. Workflows provide a high-quality service level to accommodate all parties. Based on customer feedback, we continue to make our processes more efficient and reliable so that OA publishing becomes as easy as possible.”

By working with Springer and UK institutions to implement this model we continue to identify a number of areas where further improvements could be made. Some of these are about ensuring consistency in reporting (for example, by ensuring that research funders such as RCUK are acknowledged in the articles), others are about communications with authors and continuing to simplify the administration. We will continue to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of this agreement over the year and to share findings and recommendations for best practice with institutions and publishers. We also hope that other publishers will be encouraged by our initial evaluation of the Springer Compact model and consider exploring similar flipped models.

Information on the articles published on open access can be consulted on the OpenAPC initiative website.

For more information on how you can make use of this agreement BU has with Springer, please refer to this blog post : http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/research/2016/04/11/you-can-now-publish-open-access-for-free-with-springer-open-choice-journals/

[1] Jisc has been running a series of workshops on ‘Getting the most from open access offsetting deals’ to inform staff in higher education institutions about our negotiated deals to help reduce the costs of publishing open access articles. These workshops have been attended by more than 40 participants from higher education institutions. The next workshop will be held on 25 July 2016 (https://www.jisc.ac.uk/events/getting-the-most-from-open-access-offsetting-deals-25-jul-2016).

6 July 2016

New CMMPH paper by PhD student Sheetal Sharma

international, open access, PG research, Publishing, student research, writing Edwin van Teijlingen

Today saw the publication in BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth of the paper ‘Dirty and 40 days in the wilderness: Eliciting childbirth and postnatal cultural practices and beliefs in Nepal’ with as lead author FHSS PhD student Sheetal Sharma [1]. This paper argues that pregnancy and childbirth are very much socio-cultural events that carry varying meanings across different societies and cultures. These are often translated into social expectations of what a particular society expects women to do (or not to do) during pregnancy, birth and/or the postnatal period. The study explored beliefs around childbirth in Nepal, a low-income country with a largely Hindu population. The paper then sets these findings in the context of the wider global literature around issues such as periods where women are viewed as polluted (or dirty even) after childbirth.

Sheetal is doing very well with her PhD publications as a few weeks ago her major quantitative findings paper was published in PLOS One [2]. Both papers are published in Open Access journals and therefore easily available to researchers, health promotors, health care providers and health policy-makers in low-income countries. Sheetal evaluated a research project funded by the London-based charity Green Tara Trust. Her PhD is supervised by Dr. Catherine Angell, Prof. Vanora Hundley and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen all nbased in CMMPH with external supervision from BU Visiting Faculty Prof. Padam Simkhada (liverpool John Moores University).

References:

Sharma, S., van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Angell, C., Simkhada, P. (2016) Dirty and 40 days in the wilderness: Eliciting childbirth and postnatal cultural practices and beliefs in Nepal BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth 16: 147 https://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12884-016-0938-4
Sharma, S., van Teijlingen, E., Belizán, J.M., Hundley, V., Simkhada, P., Sicuri, E. (2016) Measuring What Works: An impact evaluation of women’s groups on maternal health uptake in rural Nepal, PLOS One 11(5): e0155144 http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0155144

5 July 2016

New Harding and Pritchard paper in international health policy journal

Publishing aharding

Andrew Harding and Colin Pritchard have recently had a paper published in the International Journal of Health Policy and Management.

The paper, titled ‘UK and Twenty Comparable Countries GDP-Expenditure on-Health 1980 2013: The Historic and Continued Low Priority of UK Health Related Expenditure, uses GDPEH data to outline the low proportional commitment that the UK makes to healthcare expenditure. It is well established in the health and social policy world that the UK prioritises less of its wealth to health than almost any comparable country. However, the authors use an innovative and novel means of exploring proportional differences in commitment.

The key finding is that since 1980, in order to meet the mean average European health spend, the UK would have needed to have made an additional commitment of one-fifth. For the final period, between 2010-2013 the authors show that the UK has prioritised 12% less in proportional terms (as a % of GDP) than the European average.

The paper ends with the following quote, “Echoing others who have recently contributed to discussion in this area, if other comparable countries can make a larger proportional commitment and deem it affordable, in light of aforementioned challenges, why cannot the United Kingdom prioritise accordingly?”

5 July 2016

BU academics launch EU Referendum Analysis report within ten days of the vote

Knowledge Exchange, Public engagement, Publishing Daniel Jackson

We are very pleased to announce the publication of “EU Referendum Analysis 2016: Media, Voters and the Campaign”, edited by Daniel Jackson, Einar Thorsen (both BU) and Dominic Wring (Loughborough University).

Featuring 80 contributions from 100 leading UK academics, this publication captures the immediate thoughts, reflections and early research insights on the 2016 Referendum on UK Membership of the European Union from the cutting edge of media and politics research.

Published 10 days after the election, these contributions are short and accessible. Authors provide authoritative analysis of the campaign, including research findings or new theoretical insights; to bring readers original ways of understanding the referendum and its consequences. Contributions also bring a rich range of disciplinary influences, from political science to fan studies, journalism studies to advertising.

The publication is available as a downloadable PDF, as a website and as a printed report.

We are hosting an invitation only launch event at the House of Commons (18 July) and an open event on Brexit in Leicester (IAMCR pre-conference, 27 July).

You can register for the conference here:
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/the-brexit-campaign-2016-uk-referendum-on-membership-of-european-union-tickets-24771805136

EU Referendum Analysis website:
http://www.referendumanalysis.eu

Direct PDF download:
http://bit.ly/EUReferendumAnalysis2016_Jackson-Thorsen-and-Wring_v1

Thanks to all of our contributors and production staff who helped make the quick turnaround possible. We hope it makes for a vibrant and engaging read!

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction: the Brexit campaign (Daniel Jackson, Einar Thorsen and Dominic Wring)

Section 1: Context
1. EEC/EU campaigning in long-term perspective (Jay Blumler)
2. From Super-Market to Orwellian Super-State: the origins and growth of newspaper scepticism (Dominic Wring)
3. Understanding the role of the mass media in the EU Referendum (Mike Berry)
4. Brexit: the destruction of a collective good (Chris Gifford)
5. How the Brexit outcome has changed our understanding of referendums (John Fitzgibbon)
6. The referendum and Britain’s broken immigration politics (Andrew Geddes)
7. The great miscalculation: David Cameron’s renegotiation and the EU Referendum campaign (Andrew Glencross)

Section 2: Politics
8. Rhetoric of excess (James Martin)
9. Myth versus fact: are we living in a post-factual democracy?(Susan Banducci and Dan Stevens)
10. Destroying and building democracy, a German view(Catherine Goetze)
11. Remembrance of Referendums Past: Scotland in the campaign (Michael Higgins)
12. Public personalities in the EU debate: Elites vs. the majority and Bullingdon resurgent(Nathan Farrell)
13. Healthier ever after? The NHS as a campaign issue (Tamara Hervey)
14. Wales, immigration, news media and Brexit (Kerry Moore)
15. The referendum campaign and the public’s constitutional understanding (David Yuratich)
16. The EU referendum and the Country of Origin principle (COO) (Irini Katsirea)
17. Calming the storm: fighting falsehoods, fig leaves and fairy tales (Alan Renwick, Matthew Flinders and Will Jennings)

Section 3: News
18. The press and the Referendum campaign (David Levy, Billur Aslan and Diego Bironzo)
19. The narrow agenda: how the news media covered the Referendum (David Deacon, John Downey, Emily Harmer, James Stanyer and Dominic Wring)
20. Newspapers’ editorial opinions during the referendum campaign (Julie Firmstone)
21. Brexit ‘mansplained’: news coverage of the EU Referendum (Emily Harmer)
22. Scrutinising statistical claims and constructing balance: television news coverage of the 2016 EU Referendum (Stephen Cushion and Justin Lewis)
23. Regulated equivocation: the referendum on radio (Guy Starkey)
24. Referendum night goings on (Stephen Coleman)
25. The view from across the pond: Brexit on American media (Filippo Trevisan)
26. A victory of the nation state: the EU Referendum in the Southern European press (Iñaki Garcia-Blanco)

Section 4: Journalism
27. How our mainstream media failed democracy (Steven Barnett)
28. Divided Britain? We were already divided… (Des Freedman)
29. Deliberation, distortion and dystopia: the news media and the referendum (Charlie Beckett)
30. UK newspapers and the EU Referendum: Brexit or Bremain?(Oliver Daddow)
31. X marks the spot but the Ys have it: Referendum coverage as a boys’ own story (Karen Ross)
32. Mind the gap: the language of prejudice and the press omissions that led a people to the precipice (Paul Rowinski)
33. ‘They don’t understand us’: UK journalists’ challenges of reporting the EU (Anna Wambach)
34. Bending over backwards: the BBC and the Brexit campaign (Ivor Gaber)
35. Bums gone to Iceland: England, Brexit and Euro 2016 (Roger Domeneghetti)
36. It’s the ‘primary definers’, stupid! (Chris Roberts)
37. Brexit: inequality, the media and the democratic deficit (Natalie Fenton)

Section 5: Campaign and Political Communication
38. Why facts did matter in the campaign (Christoph Meyer)
39. Less a soap opera, more a fantasy drama? (John Street)
40. The rhetoric of the EU Referendum campaign (Andrew S. Crines)
41. A (very) brief period of Habermasian bliss (Mick Temple)
42. The toxicity of discourse: reflections on UK political culture following the EU Referendum (Katy Parry)
43. Britishness and Brexit (Frances Smith)
44. Neither tackling lies nor making the case: the Remain side (Kirsty Hughes)
45. Break-point for Brexit? How UKIP’s image of ‘hate’ set race discourse reeling back decades (James Morrison)
46. Referendum campaign broadcasts on television: A generational clash? (Vincent Campbell)
47. Interaction and ‘the floor’ in the televised debates of the EU referendum campaign(Sylvia Shaw)
48. Comedy clubs offered a better quality of debate than the political stage (Sophie Quirk)
49. ‘Project Art’ versus ‘Project Fear’: the art establishment against Brexit (Matt Hills)
50. Notes for editors: what the campaign press releases tell us about Vote Leave and Britain (Paula Keaveney)

Section 6: Parties
51. The triumph and tribulations of Conservative Euroscepticism(Philip Lynch)
52. Celebrity politicians and populist media narratives: the case of Boris Johnson (Mark Wheeler)
53. ‘Tuck your shirt in!’ It’s going to be a bumpy ride: Boris Johnson’s swerve to Brexit (Candida Yates)
54. ‘Conservative party future?’ Party disunity, the media and the EU Referendum (Anthony Ridge-Newman)
55. Cameron and the Europe question: Could it have ended any other way? (Tristan Martin)
56. The Liberal Democrats: the EU Referendum’s invisible party (Andrew Russell)
57. The Durham miners’ role in Labour’s culture wars (Eunice Goes)
58. The immigration debate: Labour versus Leave in the battle to win public trust (Thom Brooks)
59. The age of Nigel: Farage, the media, and Brexit (Neil Ewen)

Section 7: Social Media
60. Leave versus Remain: the digital battle (Andrew Mullen)
61. The results are in and the UK will #Brexit: What did social media tell us about the UK’s EU referendum? (Clare Llewellyn and Laura Cram)
62. Automatic polling using Computational Linguistics: more reliable than traditional polling? (Massimo Poesio, John Bartle, Jacqueline Bechet, Fabio Celli, Carmelo Ferrante, Marc Poch, Hugo Zaragoza and Giuseppe Riccardi)
63. Impact of social media on the outcome of the EU referendum (Vyacheslav Polonski)
64. Talking past each other: the Twitter campaigns (Simon Usherwood and Katharine Wright)
65. Political memes and polemical discourse: the rise of #usepens (Mary Mitchell)
66. E-newsletters, persuasion and the referendum (Nigel Jackson)
67. United by what divides us: 38 Degrees and the EU Referendum (James Dennis)
68. Boris, Brexit or bust (Alec Charles)

Section 8: Voters
69. What explains the failure of ‘Project Fear’? (Jane Green)
70. Workers rights in the EU and out: social class and the trade unions’ contribution to the debate (Jen Birks)
71. ‘I want my country back’: Emotion and Englishness at the Brexit ballotbox (Russell Foster)
72. Mixed feelings: how citizens expressed their attitudes towards the EU (Darren G. Lilleker)
73. ‘We want our country back’ – stop sneering, start listening (Michael Skey)
74. Young people in a changing Europe: British youth and Brexit 2016 (Matt Henn and Darren Sharpe)
75. Bonfires and Brexterity: what’s next for women? (Charlotte O’Brien)
76. The ‘Referendum Bubble’: what can we learn from EU campaign polling? (Louise Thompson)
77. Did the EU Referendum boost youth engagement with politics? (Stuart Fox and Sioned Pearce)
78. Campaign frames in the Brexit referendum (Sofia Vasilopoulou)
79. The emotional politics of the EU Referendum: Bregrexit and beyond (Karin Wahl-Jorgensen)

5 July 2016

New paper FHSS Dr. Sarah Collard

PG research, Publishing, writing Edwin van Teijlingen

Congratulations to Dr. Sarah Collard on her latest paper ‘The psychosocial impact of exercising with epilepsy: A narrative analysis’ in Epilepsy & Behavior. The paper offers valuable insight into the psychosocial benefits of and barriers to exercising with epilepsy and draw attention to the individual differences in how a person with epilepsy copes with uncontrolled seizures and their impact on his/her exercise routine. This knowledge can lead to future research in exploring how a person with epilepsy can overcome these barriers to exercise and encourage more people with epilepsy to enjoy the benefits of exercise.

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

4 July 2016

New HSS PhD paper!

BRIAN, PG research, Publishing, student research aharding

HSS PhD student Andrew Harding and fellow authors Jonathan Parker, Sarah Hean and Ann Hemingway have recently had a paper accepted for publication in Social Policy & Society, the sister publication to the Journal of Social Policy and run by the Social Policy Association.

A critical yet under-researched area, the paper presents a comprehensive literature review that critiques current research on the outcome/impact of information and advice on welfare. A realist evaluation approach is then proposed as being capable to address critical weaknesses in existing research.

Among other areas that are covered, the paper provides an overview of the importance of information and advice in the context of the marketisation of UK welfare provision and a new ‘efficacy framework’ is developed which can be used to assess the scope of research.

A final draft post-refereeing version of the paper will be uploaded to BRIAN in due course.

1 July 2016

Why editorials?

international, Knowledge Transfer, open access, Publishing, Research Integritiy, writing Edwin van Teijlingen

BU academics are editors on a wide range of scientific journals. As editors we often write editorials for academic journals which have a number of specific functions. It is a key means of communication between the editor(s) and the journal’s readership. It is also vehicle to highlight topical academic and political issues related to the journal and the discipline(s) it represents.

Earlier this week the latest issue of the Journal of Asian Midwives came out with an editorial which is an illustration of the first point giving information to the readers [1]. The topics addressed in this editorial included the announcement that this new journal was now indexed in the CINAHL Database, a recent major international conference in the field and a call for the forthcoming 2017 ICM (Internation Confederation of Midwives) tri-annual conference. Today saw the publication of an editorial on the Zika virus and its potential impact in Nepal in the journal Medical Science [2]. This guest editorial co-written by BU’s Visiting Faculties Dr. Brijesh Sathian and Prof. Padam Simkhada with Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen (Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health) calls for action in Nepal. A country where malaria is endemic. The Zika virus uses mosquitoes like the ones spreading Dengue fever and malaria. Zika is a virus we do not wish to see spreading in countries where malaria is already rife. The editorial warns that precautionary measures are needed to prevent a Zika outbreak as the spread of the virus to the country seems inevitable, the only uncertainty is when it will be arriving.

Both journals are Open Access which means these editorials can be read by anybody with internet access free of charge.

References:

Jan, R., van Teijlingen, E. (2016) Editorial JAM June 2016, Journal of Asian Midwives 3(1):1. http://ecommons.aku.edu/jam/vol3/iss1/1/
van Teijlingen, E., Sathian, B., & Simkhada, P. (2016). Zika & Nepal: a far greater risk for its population than to individuals. Medical Science 4(2): 312-313. http://www.pubmedhouse.com/journals/ms/articles/1064/PMHID1064.pdf

29 June 2016

New paper on Birthing Centres in Nepal

international, open access, PG research, Publishing, student research, writing Edwin van Teijlingen

Congratulations to Preeti Mahato in the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH) on the publication of a paper based on her Ph.D. research. Her paper ‘Birthing centres in Nepal: Recent developments, obstacles and opportunities’ can be found in the June 2016 edition of the Journal of Asian Midwives (JAM) [1]. All articles in JAM are Open Access to ensure midwives and researchers in the poorest parts of Asia can freely access the scientific articles in the journal.

This literature review was appraised the relevant literature on birthing centres in Nepal, South Asia, and other similar settings. Preeti and her co-authors concluded that birthing centres in Nepal have the potential to improve both (a) the institutional delivery rate; and (b) the proportion of births that benefit from the presence of a skilled birth attendant (SBA). However, accessibility, socio-demographic characteristics, and cultural factors act as barriers to pregnant women attending birthing centres and hospital facilities.

Preeti’s Ph.D. is supervised by Dr. Catherine Angell and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen in CMMPH and Prof. Padam Simkhada at Liverpool John Moores University. Padam is also Visiting Faculty at the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences (FHSS).

Reference:

Mahato, P., van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P., Angell, C. (2016) Birthing centres in Nepal: Recent developments, obstacles and opportunities, Journal of Asian Midwives 3(1): 17-30.

24 June 2016

Best paper award!

international, open access, PG research, Publishing, student research, writing Edwin van Teijlingen

Best Paper for 2015 Award in the international journal Heart. A paper published by Bournemouth University PhD student, Edward Carlton, and his supervisors, Prof. Ahmed Khattab (FHSS) and Prof. Kim Greaves from the University of the Sunshine Coast in Australia in collaboration with world-renowned hospitals: John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford; Royal Brisbane & Women’s Hospital in Australia; and Christchurch Hospital in New Zealand has been announced as the Winner of the “Heart Best Paper 2015 Award” [1]. This award is in recognition of the high quality and clinical impact of the paper. The winner for this award were chosen by the Editorial Team from the top 10 papers in each of the following three categories: downloads, citations and Altmetrics Score.

Dr. Edward Carlton has just finished his PhD at BU and he is now working as an Emergency Medicine Consultant in Bristol.

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

Reference:

Carlton EW, Cullen L, Than M, Gamble J, Khattab A, Greaves K. A novel diagnostic protocol to identify patients suitable for discharge after a single high-sensitivity troponin. Heart. 2015 Jul;101(13):1041-6. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2014-307288. Epub 2015 Feb 17.

19 June 2016

Announcing the first WAN Book Launch

Fusion, Public engagement, Publishing, Women's Academic Network Sara Ashencaen Crabtree

First WAN book launch

Sara Ashencaen Crabtree, Heather Savigny & Jaeyeon Choe

The Women’s Academic Network (WAN) is heading towards its 3^rd birthday in the Autumn. During that time we’ve put on many events designed to inspire our members, air and discuss concerns, build confidence, offer support and undertake research. We’ve heard some extraordinary speakers like feminist godmother, Germaine Greer, and courageous polar explorer, Felicity Aston.

Now it’s time to celebrate our own remarkable female colleagues. So where better to look for inspiration than the University of Cambridge book focusing on insights from their female dons in The Meaning of Success. Consequently next academic year we are planning to create a WAN publication of what women’s success looks like at BU, which will be used for general use across the university and beyond.

To embark on this new journey we were delighted to hold the first WAN book launch in May to celebrate the recent and important publications of three WAN colleagues. Professor Candida Yates is the author of The Play of Political Culture, Emotion & Identity , a highly intriguing and original socio-political-psychoanalytic analysis of relationships made and manipulated between the viewer and the political media ‘personality’.

Dr Bronwen Thomas, Associate Professor, has produced a ground-breaking textbook entitled Narrative: the basics. This volume draws from her extensive teaching practice to bring together a wealth of theoretical material to explain the diverse forms of and models underpinning fictional narrative.

Finally, Dr Julia Round, Principal Lecturer, has produced a marvellously eye-catching monograph with obvious wide readership appeal: Gothic in Comics & Graphic Novels Here the interface between comics and the gothic is examined through multiple analytic lenses.

Which brings us most appropriately to an early preview about The Shelley-Frankenstein Festival, 7^thNovember ~ WAN is delighted to be part of the launch of this new and innovative Bournemouth-wide festival with 2 public engagement seminars planned at BU. Stakeholders include St Peter’s Town Centre Parish Church, Bournemouth County Council, AUB, Shelley Theatre, artists and musicians. More details to follow.

17 June 2016

New collaborative Nepal paper

international, open access, Publishing, student research Edwin van Teijlingen

Today BU staff and post-graduate students published our latest diabetes paper. In the International Journal of Food, Nutrition and Public Health (IJFNPH) publish by the World Association for Sustainable Development (WASD) you’ll find ‘Diabetes prevention and management in South Asia: a call for action‘.

The lead BU author is Dr. Pramod Regmi. he is joint by Faculty of Health & Social Sciences (FHSS) PhD student Ms. Folashade Alloh as well as Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen of the Centre for Midwfiery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH). Further national and international co-authors are: Dr. Om Kurmi based at the Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford; Dr. Nirmal Aryal, from the Department of Medicine, University of Otago, New Zealand; Dr.Puspa Raj Pant based at the Centre for Child and Adolescent Health, University of the West of England; and Amrit Banstola based in the Faculty of Health and Applied Sciences, also at the University of the West of England.

The paper can be found here! Please note, you need to be a WASD member to login and download this paper. Once you are logged in you will see a ‘Download’ button in the box above. If you do not have a login, you can register to join WASD free of charge.

14 June 2016

New publication Carol Bond & Osman Ahmed

international, Publishing, writing Edwin van Teijlingen

The week saw the publication of a new book by Elsevier (June 9th) Health Through Social Media which contains a chapter by FHSS staff Drs Carol Bond and Osman Ahmed called ‘Patient Empowerment Through Social Media’. Carol and Osman have a wide-ranging experience in researching and publishing about e-health, m-health and social media. They co-authored this topical chapter with a colleague in Australia.

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

13 June 2016

FHSS PhD student awarded Civil Society Scholar Award (CSSA) by the Open Society Foundations

international, PG research, Publishing, student research Edwin van Teijlingen

We like to congratulate Ms. Preeti Mahato, Ph.D. student in the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal and Perinal Health (CMMPH) in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences, has been awarded a Civil Society Scholar Award by the Open Society Foundations for US$ 8,000. The Civil Society Scholar Award offers support for international research activities, such as fieldwork, research visits, or research collaboration at institutions abroad. Preeti has been awarded her scholarship for her Ph.D. fieldwork in Nepal. Her Ph.D. project is a mixed-methods study of birthing centres in Nawalparasi, in southern Nepal. In Nepal, birthing centres act as first contact point for pregnant women seeking maternity services especially basic obstetric care.

Preeti is supervised by Dr. Catherine Angell and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen, both based in CMMPH and BU Visiting Faculty Prof. Padam Simkhada, who is based at Liverpool John Moores University. This is the third piece of really good news this year for Preeti as last month she gave birth to a lovely baby girl and earlier this year the first article from her Ph.D. research was accepted for publication in the Asian Journal for Midwives.

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

9 June 2016

BU-Nepal link highlighted

international, Publishing, writing Edwin van Teijlingen

This week BU’s work in Nepal was highlighted in several ways. Most publicly on the wonderful new mural at Talbot Campus. Secondly, BU currently displays some of the entries of images to the past two years of its research photo competition. The photos show the creativity of BU’s academics and students as well as the fascinating range of research taking place at the university. One of these pictures was taken by FHSS Visiting Faculty Dr. Bibha Simkhada during fieldwork in Dhading, Nepal. The selected photos are on display in the Atrium Art Gallery until the 13th of June.

Last, but not least, another FHSS Visiting Faculty, Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust midwife Jillian Ireland published a blog on her involvement in the THET-funded project in Nepal. She reflects on her time as UK volunteer in Nepal. Jilly wrote: ” Three volunteers Andrea Lawrie, David Havelock and I are keen to share what we experienced in a paper sometime soon and today I will condense some of my own reflections. I wrote ‘letters’ (via email) to my Head of Midwifery, Sandra Chitty and to Senior Lecturer in Midwifery at Bournemouth University Dr. Jen Leamon while I was away, using different styles of expression to ‘get at’ my reflections from more than one angle. It helped me to separate out elements of the whole experience.”

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

6 June 2016

Linking your BRIAN account with your ORCID account

BRIAN, Publishing Pengpeng

A recent upgrade on BRIAN means that you are now able to link your ORCID ID with your BRIAN account. Click on this link to register for an ORCID account if you haven’t already got one.

Configuring ORCID is really easy. Go to your BRIAN homepage and scroll to the bottom of the page where you’ll find your ‘Data sources’. Simply click ‘configure’ next to the ORCID data source and you’ll be greeted with an authentication screen to either login or register with ORCID.

Once the accounts have been linked, BRIAN will periodically search ORCID for your “works” containing a DOI, PubMed ID or Scopus ID. Using these identifiers, BRIAN will then collect trusted metadata from other data sources including PubMed, Scopus and CrossRef and automatically associate this harvested data with a your BRIAN account.

About ORCID

ORCID is an open, non-profit, community-based effort to provide a registry of unique researcher identifiers and a transparent method of linking research activities and outputs to these identifiers. ORCID is unique in its ability to reach across disciplines, research sectors, and national boundaries and its cooperation with other identifier systems. Find out more on their website.

31 May 2016

All scientific papers to be free by 2020 under EU proposals

open access, Publishing Pengpeng

All publicly funded scientific papers published in Europe could be made free to access by 2020, under a “life-changing” reform ordered by the European Union’s science chief, Carlos Moedas.

The Competitiveness Council, a gathering of ministers of science, innovation, trade and industry, agreed on the target following a two-day meeting in Brussels last week.

The move means publications of the results of research supported by public and public-private funds would be freely available to and reusable by anyone. It could affect the paid-for subscription model used by many scientific journals, and undermine the common practice of releasing reports under embargo.

At present the results of some publicly funded research are not accessible to people outside universities and similar institutions without one-off payments, which means that many teachers, doctors, entrepreneurs and others do not have access to the latest scientific insights. In the UK, funding bodies generally require that researchers publish under open access terms, with open access publishing fees paid from the researcher’s grant.

The council said this data must be made accessible unless there were well-founded reasons for not doing so, such as intellectual property rights or security or privacy issues.

The changes are part of a broader set of recommendations in support of Open Science, a concept that also includes improved storage of and access to research data, Science magazine reports.

Open Science has been heavily lobbied for by the Dutch government, which currently holds the presidency of the Council of the EU, as well as by Moedas, the European commissioner for research and innovation.

Moedas told a press conference: “We probably don’t realise it yet, but what the Dutch presidency has achieved is unique and huge. The commission is totally committed to help move this forward.”

“To achieve that, Europe must be as attractive as possible for researchers and startups to locate here and for companies to invest. That calls for knowledge to be freely shared. The time for talking about open access is now past. With these agreements, we are going to achieve it in practice.”

The League of European Research Universities called the decision “a major boost for the transition towards and Open Science system”.

But while the council has called for immediate open access “without embargoes or with as short as possible embargoes”, some said the 2020 target was unrealistic.

A spokesperson for the council told Science magazine that it “may not be an easy task”, but spoke of the council’s resolve. “This is not a law, but it’s a political orientation for the 28 governments. The important thing is that there is a consensus.”

Original article published here – https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/may/28/eu-ministers-2020-target-free-access-scientific-papers

30 May 2016

New paper BU PhD student Sheetal Sharma

open access, PG research, Publishing, writing Edwin van Teijlingen

Congratulations to FHSS PhD student Sheetal Sharma on her latest paper [1]. The paper ‘Measuring What Works: An impact evaluation of women’s groups on maternal health uptake in rural Nepal’ appeared this week in the journal PLOS One. Sheetal’s innovative mixed-methods approach was applied to a long-running maternity intervention in rural Nepal. The paper concludes that community-based health promotion in Sheetal’s study had a greater affect on the uptake of antenatal care and less so on delivery care. Other factors not easily resolved through health promotion interventions may influence these outcomes, such as costs or geographical constraints. The evaluation has implications for policy and practice in public health, especially maternal health promotion.

Reference:

Sharma, S., van Teijlingen, E., Belizán, J.M., Hundley, V., Simkhada, P., Sicuri, E. (2016) Measuring What Works: An impact evaluation of women’s groups on maternal health uptake in rural Nepal, PLOS One 11(5): e0155144 http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0155144

Category / Publishing

The Springer Compact offset model: update on progress

BU academics launch EU Referendum Analysis report within ten days of the vote

New paper FHSS Dr. Sarah Collard

New paper on Birthing Centres in Nepal

Best paper award!

Announcing the first WAN Book Launch

New publication Carol Bond & Osman Ahmed

FHSS PhD student awarded Civil Society Scholar Award (CSSA) by the Open Society Foundations

Linking your BRIAN account with your ORCID account

About ORCID

All scientific papers to be free by 2020 under EU proposals

Other services

Don’t miss a post!

Recent posts

Search by Category

Research Information Network

UKRI

Category / Publishing

About ORCID

Other services

Don’t miss a post!

Recent posts

Search by Category

Search by popular post topics