Category / Publishing

Emerald Literati Network : 2012 Awards for Excellence

Publishing, Research themes

Image of Dr Heather Hartwell

Bournemouth University’s Associate Professor Dr Heather Hartwell has been chosen as an Outstanding Reviewer at the Emerald Literati Network Awards for Excellence 2012. Each year Emerald names and rewards the Outstanding Reviewers who contribute to the success of the journals.  Each journal’s Editor has nominated the Reviewer they believe has been that title’s most Outstanding Reviewer.

The most Outstanding Reviewers are chosen following consultation amongst the journal’s Editors, who are eminent academics or managers. Dr Hartwell was selected for the very impressive and significant contribution she made as a Reviewer to the British Food Journal throughout 2011.

Increasing publication impact – open access publishing

Publishing

open access logo, Public Library of ScienceResearch indicates that articles published via open access outlets normally achieve higher citation counts and increased downloads. Open access publishing typically has much shorter publication times, often only 2-3 months between submission and publication. This means your research findings can be in the public domain while they are still novel, which makes them more likely to be picked up by colleagues. Research by David et al. (2008) found that open access articles were associated with 89% more full text downloads, 42% more PDF downloads, and 23% more unique visitors than subscription access articles in the first six months after publication.

BU staff have access to a dedicated central budget – the Open Access Publication Fund – to meet open access publishing costs.

Book Citation Index for WoK – 3 month Trial – take part now!

Publishing

BU have just enabled a trial of Web of Knowledge Book Citation Index.  It will last for 3 months, until 6th August.

The Book Citation Index allows you to search for books and book chapters using all of the fields and features available in Web of Science. They have added two new indexes to Web of Science:

  • Book Citation Index– Science (BKCI-S) — 2005-present
  • Book Citation Index– Social Sciences & Humanities (BKCI-SSH) — 2005-present

Key features available when searching for books and book chapters include:

  • View citation counts captured for books and book chapters for Citing Articles, Cited References, Related Records, and Shared Records for all available years.
  • View citation counts provided to book sources from journal articles and conference-proceedings that cite books and book chapters and vice-versa.

Whilst we don’t currently have a subscription, we are interested in seeing what the coverage is like for BU academics, particularly in the humanities and social sciences that have traditionally experienced less comprehensive coverage by citation databases, although science books are also covered.   Please note, not all published books appear here, with concentration on purely research books rather than text books or more populist titles.

There are 143 items listed as having BU Authors:

http://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/library/resources/w.html

Please have a look at what WoK can offer and provide feedback to Emma Crowley: e-mail: ecrowley@bournemouth.ac.uk web site: Library and Learning Support

Centre for Post Qualifying Social Work launch new Safeguarding frameworks

Publishing

National Competence for Safeguarding Adults front coverNational Competence Framework for Safeguarding Adults

Learn to Care and Bournemouth University undertook this work in partnership to reflect the significant role that learning and developing plays in the delivery of high standards of social work and social care.

The framework will be invaluable to Adult Safeguarding Boards, practitioners and learning and development personnel, both in managing performance and delivering quality outcomes for people who are made vulnerable by their circumstances.

 

National Competence Framework for Safeguarding ChildrenNational Competence for Safeguarding Children front cover

This document complies with legislation, statutory guidance and best practice in relation to the safeguarding of children. Local Safeguarding Boards should take account of local needs, including an assessment of the effectiveness of multi-agency training to safeguard and promote the welfare of children and young people (Munro, 2011).

This document incorporates the recommendations from Professor Eileen Munro’s review into Child Protection in England and Wales.

The aim of this Framework, as with the other publication in this series – National Competence Framework for Safeguarding Adults – is to provide a baseline for standards of competence that individuals can expect to receive from those professionals and organisations, who are tasked with Safeguarding Children. It also provides employees and employers with a benchmark for the minimum standard of competence required of those who work to safeguard children across a range of sectors.

BUCRU – Supporting the development of grant applications

Awarded & submitted bids, Funding opportunities, Post-award, Publishing, Research assessment

In today’s post we give a case study of how Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU) recently supported the development of a grant application.

Case study

We recently supported a Programme Development Grant (www.ccf.nihr.ac.uk/PGfAR/PDG/Pages/default.aspx) application to the National Health Service (NHS) National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The Unit receives funding from the NIHR to be the Dorset Office of the NIHR Research Design Service (RDS), and thus can support local researchers in the University and the NHS to develop their funding applications. The topic of this grant application was early warning systems for use in an obstetric setting. Early warning systems are used by clinical staff in hospital to identify clinical problems before they get too serious, for example by regularly monitoring vital signs such as blood pressure. The purpose of Programme Development Grants is to fund preliminary work ahead of a larger Programme Grant for Applied Research (PGAR; www.ccf.nihr.ac.uk/PGfAR/Pages/Home.aspx). 

This support involved:

  • Providing methodological input in systematic reviews, surveys, qualitative designs, quantitative designs notably a sample size calculation, and trial design.
  • Patient and public involvement (PPI) – the team has a designated person supporting PPI.
  • Team development – a strong team needed to be developed with the appropriate skill mix to deliver the programme of research.  Four members of BUCRU became co-applicants on the proposal bringing methodological expertise in systematic reviews, qualitative research, quantitative research, and PPI support.  Via our link with the RDS we also have access to health economist support.   Collaborations were initiated with the Wessex Health Innovation and Education Cluster (HIEC; www.wessexhiecpartnership.org.uk/) to gain support in the educational/ training aspects of the research.  
  • Liaison – we liaised with a number of different organisations, such as Research and Knowledge Exchange Operations for costing the Bournemouth University (BU) costs, the NHS host organisation that will be responsible for the research, and the Market Research Group (MRG; https://mrg.bournemouth.ac.uk/) who were involved to support the administration and data entry for the survey component of the project.
  • Identification of appropriate funding schemes.
  • Obtained peer review from RDS colleagues across the region to provide feedback on the suitability of the funding scheme and the ‘readiness’ for submission. This service is usually provided through regular Scientific Committee meetings that act as ‘mock’ funding committees (www.rds-sw.nihr.ac.uk/scientific_committee.htm).

Quote from lead applicant: “Without the expertise and assistance of BUCRU staff it would not have been possible to even contemplate applying for a large and competitive grant such as the NIHR Programme Development Grant” .

Please contact us for support with health research:

Louise Ward (administrator):

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit

R505 Royal London House

Christchurch Road

Bournemouth BH1 3LT

BUCRU@bournemouth.ac.uk

Tel: 01202 961939

http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/bucru/

People at Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU)

Awarded & submitted bids, Post-award, Publishing, Research assessment

In yesterday’s posting we gave a brief introduction to BUCRU. Today we introduce you to the members of the team.

 

Louise Ward

Louise is one of the administrators for the unit and has been with the team since 2008.  She has worked in various NHS settings and has an interest in marketing.  Both her undergraduate and Masters degrees were studied here at Bournemouth University.

Professor Paul Thompson

Paul is Consultant Rheumatologist at Poole Hospitaland Visiting Professor at BU. He was appointed Director of the Centre of Postgraduate Medical Research and Education (CoPMRE) in 2007, where he has been leading developments between research and education active doctors in NHS Trusts and the academic community at the University. He is Co-director of BUCRU, Lead for the musculoskeletal local priority group for the Western Comprehensive Local Research Network (CLRN) and Fellow of the NHS Improvement Faculty. He is interested in clinical research and service development in the rheumatic diseases. He supervises PhD students and is an External Examiner at other Universities.

Dr Sarah Thomas

Sarah is Deputy Director (methodology). She has a background in psychology and since 2000 has worked in the NHS in Dorset.  As well as supporting other researchers in a Research Design Service capacity, she also conducts research. Her main research interests are in the field of multiple sclerosis (MS) and she is currently Chief Investigator for a pilot study funded by the UK MS Society exploring the use of the Nintendo Wii™ in people with MS.

Professor Peter Thomas

Peter is Co-Director and leads on research methodology. He has a background in epidemiology and statistics, and has been with Bournemouth University since 1996. He has a special research interest in psychosocial aspects of chronic disease and much of his recent work has focussed on multiple sclerosis.

Dr Zoe Sheppard

Zoe is a demographer with particular experience investigating socio-economic status.  She joined Bournemouth University in October 2009 as a Research Fellow in Research Methods.  She provides research methods support for people doing health research and support writing grant applications in her National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Research Design Service (RDS) capacity.

Suzanne Sheppard

Suzanne is a Clinical Researcher recently recruited from the pharmaceutical industry to help manage the unit’s clinical trials.  She has experience in setting-up and monitoring clinical trials across phases 1 to 3 in a variety of therapeutic areas. 

Annabel Kenny

Annabel is a Clinical Research Administrator who joined Bournemouth University in October 2009.  She provides support to Dr. Tamas Hickish, Consultant Medical Oncologist, Royal Bournemouth Hospital/Poole Hospital and the rest of the research team on various ongoing research projects within the Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit.

Liz Griffiths

Liz works for the Royal Bournemouth Hospital as a research facilitator.  She has been working in research within the NHS since 2003 in a variety of roles.  Currently focusing on supporting researchers to develop proposals and prepare submissions to regulatory authorities.

Louise Fazakarley

Louise is a Physiotherapy lecturer with experience in neurological rehabilitation, the management of chronic disability and rehabilitation research. She joined Bournemouth University in 2006 to establish and teach on the BSc (Hons) Physiotherapy course. Louise is currently working on the MS Society funded pilot study to look at the Nintendo Wii™ as a method of helping people with MS increase their physical activity.

Audrey Dixon

Audrey is the Centre of Postgraduate Medical Research and Education (CoPMRE) co-ordinator and co-administrator for BUCRU.  She has worked for the NHS since 1988.  She first joined Professor Paul Thompson in 2001 to assist him with his academic work, following his secondment to the university.  Audrey was seconded to BU in 2003.  She now looks after a growing Visiting Faculty of 41 members and the education arm of CoPMRE. She is very proud to see the little acorn grow into a Centre of Postgraduate Medical Research and Education and BUCRU.

Roger Baker

Roger is Professor of Clinical Psychology and runs the MSc course Foundations in Clinical Psychology at BU. He is also a Consultant Clinical Psychologist at Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust.  He has expertise in the design of assessments and questionnaires, research design and clinical evaluation of services and has worked in a dual role as researcher and clinical psychologist at Leeds, Aberdeen & Bournemouth Universities and in NHS Trusts specialising in Mental Health.

Helen Allen

Helen is a health psychologist with a nursing and midwifery background.  She has a qualitative background with a particular interest in the mind:body interface and chronic disease, including patient empowerment.  She is the Unit lead on Public Patient Involvement.

Contact us: In the first instance please contact:

 Louise Ward (administrator):

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit

R505 Royal London House

Christchurch Road

Bournemouth BH1 3LT

BUCRU@bournemouth.ac.uk

Tel: 01202 961939

http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/bucru/

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU)

Awarded & submitted bids, Post-award, Publishing, Research assessment

This week the Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU) will be posting daily blogs. In these blogs we will tell you a little about the Unit, what we do, who we are, and how we might be able to help in your research endeavours.

What is BUCRU?  

BUCRU is a new model for supporting and conducting health related research in Dorset. It supports researchers in improving the quality, quantity and efficiency of research across the University and local National Health Service (NHS) Trusts. It does this by:

  • helping researchers with developing high quality applications for external research funding (including small grants)
  • ongoing involvement in funded research projects
  • a “pay-as-you-go” consultation service for other work

How can BUCRU help?

BUCRU can provide help in the following areas:

  • Study design
  • Quantitative and qualitative research methods
  • Statistics, data management and data analysis
  • Patient and public involvement in research
  • Trial management
  • Ethics, governance and other regulatory issues
  • Linking University and NHS researchers

BUCRU focuses on health research that has relevance to the NHS. The Unit is available to Bournemouth University staff and people working locally in the NHS. There are no general restrictions on topic area or professional background of the researcher. However we do have special interests in areas such as chronic disease and complex interventions (interventions in nursing, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, psychology and so on).

How is it funded?  

BUCRU is partly funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and incorporates the Dorset office of the NIHR Research Design Service (http://www.rds-sw.nihr.ac.uk). Further funding comes from a variety of research grants and contracts.

Contact us: In the first instance please contact

Louise Ward (administrator):

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit

R505 Royal London House

Christchurch Road

Bournemouth BH1 3LT

BUCRU@bournemouth.ac.uk

Tel: 01202 961939

http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/bucru/

Make your research freely available to a global audience via open access!

Guidance, Publishing

open access logo, Public Library of ScienceThe BU Open Access Publication Fund was launched in August 2011 with the aim of making BU research freely accessible to a global audience.

Since then the open access publication costs for eight papers have been met by the Fund, including papers authored by Professor Mark Hadfield, Professor Adrian Newton, Dr Julie Kirkby, and Professor Jonathan Parker.

The fund is available for use by any BU author ready to submit a completed article for publication who wishes to make their output freely and openly accessible.

For further information about the Open Access Publication Fund and how to get involved, see our previous Blog post – Launch of the BU Open Access Publication Fund.

Royal Society opens up its journal archive

Publishing

The Royal Society continues to support scientific discovery by allowing free access to more than 250 years of leading research.  Their world-famous journal archive has been opened up and all articles more than 70 years old have been made permanently free to access. 

The Royal Society is the world’s oldest scientific publisher and, as such, their archive is the most comprehensive in science.  It comprises more than 69,000 articles, from the very first published in 
the world’s first peer-reviewed journal Philosophical Transactions to the first article published in the recently launched journal Open Biology.

Thomas Henry Huxley FRS wrote in 1870: ‘If all the books in the world, except the Philosophical Transactions were to be destroyed, it is safe to say that the foundations of physical science would remain unshaken, and that the vast intellectual progress of the last two centuries would be largely, though incompletely, recorded.’

Professor Uta Frith FRS, Chair of the Royal Society library committee, says: ‘The release of these papers opens a fascinating window on the history of scientific progress over the last few centuries and will be of interest to anybody who wants to understand how science has evolved since the days of the Royal Society’s foundation.’

The move to open up their publishing archive is part of the Royal Society’s ongoing commitment to open access in scientific publishing.  It also comes soon after the launch of the Society’s first ever fully open access journal, Open Biology. 

Open Access publishing event is a success!

Guidance, Publishing

Despite a near accident with a jug of milk, 30 cups and a projector screen twenty minutes before the start of the event, Wednesday’s open access (OA) publishing seminar was a huge success! Roughly 30 BU academics, researchers and PGR students attended the event which was aimed at increasing awareness, dispelling some of the myths, and demonstrating the benefits of open access publishing. There was also an opportunity for attendees to find out about the recently launched BU Open Access Publication Fund.

The event opened with a fantastic presentation by Dr Alma Swan (Key Perspectives Ltd) who spoke passionately about the benefits of open access publishing and archiving, showing clear demonstrations of how making your research available in open access outlets (and in BURO) dramatically increases the number of citations and leads to more people downloading the research papers. Of particular interest were her stats on who actually downloads open access papers published via the PubMed outlet: other academics and university students only account for 25% of downloads, and by far the biggest consumer of open access literature are ‘citizens’ (i.e. independent researchers, patients and their families, teachers, amateur or part-time researchers, other interested minds), who account for 40% of the research papers downloaded from PubMed. These are almost always people who would not normally have access to research published in traditional print journals.

The second speaker was Willow Fuchs from the Centre for Research Communications (CRC) at the University of Nottingham. Willow gave an excellent presentation on the Sherpa Services that were developed and maintained by the CRC. These include RoMEO, Juliet and OpenDOAR. Authors can look up journals using the RoMEO database to check whether archiving in repositories is permitted (such as BURO) and, if so, what version of the paper can be made available. Authors can also easily check the publisher’s policies and see whether the journal offers a hybrid publishing option (i.e. the paper will still be published in the traditional print journal but will also be made freely available via the internet). It currently covers over 1,000 publishers and is an excellent source of information. Willow also mentioned the Juliet database which lists funder open access requirements, and the OpenDOAR  database which is a searchable directory of open access repositories, such as BURO. All three of the Sherpa Service resources are freely accessible via the links in the text above.

The event then focused on BU’s experience of open access publishing with presentations from Prof Edwin van Teijlingen and Prof Peter Thomas. Prof Edwin van Teijlingen (HSC) talked of the benefits of making his research findings freely available in terms of free access to the information, the quick turnaround times, and the high quality of the open access publications available in his field. Prof Peter Thomas primarily focused on the quick publication times which are particularly beneficial for the publication of the study protocols for the randomised control trials he has been involved with (his experience is that there is usually only 2-5 months between submitting the paper and its publication). He also displayed the access statistics from BioMed Central showing how many downloads there had been each month of his paper (between 18-77 downloads per month).

Prof Matthew Bennett closed the event by emphasising that the consumers of research not just academics; as BU moves to society-led research then the need to communicate research findings with non-academics will become even more important. He gave an overview of the recently launched BU Open Access Publication Fund, explaining how BU academics can access central funds to publish their papers in open access outlets (including traditional print journals with a hybrid option to make the paper freely available on the internet in addition to the print journal). Two BU academics have already benefited from the central fund and published their research in open access outlets – Prof Colin Pritchard (HSC) who published in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, and Dr Julie Kirkby (DEC) who will shortly have a paper published by Plos ONE.

All in all this was an excellent event and a fabulous launch for the new open access fund! Expect to read more on open access publishing on the Blog over the coming months!

You can access the slides from the event from this I-drive folder: I:\CRKT\Public\RDU\Open access\event 261011

BU staff making an impact with their publications

Publishing

I am sure that you would wish to join with me in congratulating both Richard Shipway and Philippa Hudson from the School of Tourism on their papers being in the top 10 most downloaded papers in Perspectives in Public Health.

Together they have achieved 1,337 people who have looked at their work.

Richard’s paper is titled Sustainable legacies for the 2012 Olympic Games and is second in the table and Philippa’s Food safety issues and children’s lunchboxes is fourth in the table.

Well done to them! I was very proud in the meeting with Sage last week.

Dr Heather Hartwell  Honorary Editor

 

Comment on copyright term extension

Publishing

The deed is done. Copyright term extension for sound recordings from 50 to 70 years was adopted yesterday (12 September 2011) by qualified majority in the European Council. The remaining opposition came from Belgium, the Czech Republic, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden. Austria and Estonia abstained.

The chorus of approval has been led by aging artists, masking the fact that for more than a decade the lobby for copyright extension has been resourced by the multinational record industry (see related BBC news item). Labels do not want to lose the revenues of the classic recordings of the 1960s which are reaching the end of their current 50 year term. Rather than innovating, right holders find it much easier to exclude competition. Europe is in danger of locking away her music heritage just as digital technology is enabling the opening of the archives.

It is not surprising that many performers’ organisations and collecting societies support the Directive. They do not have to carry the costs – which will exceed EURO 1 billion to the general public (based on the Commission’s own figures – see calculations in Joint Academic Statement issued by Centre for Intellectual Property Policy & Management (CIPPM, Bournemouth University), the Centre for Intellectual Property & Information Law (CIPIL, Cambridge University), the Institute the Institute for Information Law (IViR, University of Amsterdam), and the Max Planck Competition and Tax Law (Munich).

72 percent of the financial benefits from term extension will accrue to record labels. Of the 28 percent that will go to artists, most of the money will go to superstar acts, with only 4 percent benefiting those musicians mentioned in the European Council press release as facing an “income gap at the end of their life times” (New rules on term of protection of music recordings, Council of the EU, 12/09/11). Many performers also do not appear to understand that the proposal would lead to a redistribution of income from living to dead artists.

In an interview with the NY Times yesterday, I said: “This is a dreadful day for musicians and consumers. Policymakers are schizophrenic, speaking a language of change and innovation, but then respond to lobbying by extending the right which gave rise to the problem in the first place. This only entrenches a cynical attitude toward copyright law and brings it into further disrepute.”

Sweden and Belgium issued dissents after the vote in the Council. They are worth quoting in full: Interinstitutional File: 2008/0157 (COD)

Declaration by Sweden

Throughout the negotiations, Sweden has had strong reservations regarding the commission’s proposal to extend the term of protection for sound recordings.

As regards copyright regulation in general Sweden has always stressed the importance of taking all relevant aspects and involved interests into account, in order to maintain a fair balance in the copyright system. We believe this to be essential if we are to successfully uphold respect for the copyright system in the future.

Extending the term of protection for sound recordings as proposed is neither fair nor balanced. It therefore risks undermining the respect for copyright in general even further. Such a development is very unfortunate for all those who depend on copyright protection to make a living.

Sweden believes there to be good reasons for measures aiming at improving the situation for those professional musicians and other artists who often operate under economically difficult conditions. Extending the term of protection will however not primarily be of benefit to this group.

Against this background Sweden regrets the decision to adopt the proposal amending Directive 2006/116/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights.

Belgian declaration

With regard to the proposal for a directive on the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights, Belgium believes that a term extension is not an appropriate measure to improve the situation of the performing artists. Furthermore, we believe that the negative consequences the proposal entails do not outweigh the advantages it brings. We can therefore not support this proposal.

It seems that the measure will mainly benefit record producers and not performing artists, will only have a very limited effect for most of the performing artists, will have a negative impact on the accessibility of cultural material such as those contained in libraries and archives, and will create supplementary financial and administrative burdens to enterprises, broadcasting organisations and consumers. Therefore, the overall package of the proposal appears, as demonstrated by a large amount of academic studies [1], unbalanced.

Finally, one has to observe that several initiatives which have clear links with and impact on the proposal, have recently been adopted or announced by the Commission in its Communication of 24 May 2011 [2]. These initiatives include for example a proposal for a directive on orphan works, a new initiative on collective management, and a new initiative on online distribution of audiovisual works. Taking into account this global approach of copyright issues in the internal market, we think that it would only be reasonable to re-examine the merits of this proposal in the context of this global approach.

Notes

[1] See e.g. “The Proposed Directive for a Copyright Term Extension – A backward-looking package” Centre for Intellectual Property Policy & Management (CIPPM, Bournemouth University), the Centre for Intellectual Property & Information Law (CIPIL, Cambridge University), the Institute the Institute for Information Law (IViR, University of Amsterdam), and the Max Planck Competition and Tax Law (Munich); N. HELBERGER, N. DUFFT, S. VAN GOMPEL, B. HUGENHOLTZ, ‘Never forever: why extending the term of protection for sound recordings is a bad idea’, EIPR 2008, 174; S. DUSOLLIER, ‘Les artistes-interprètes pris en otage’, Auteurs & Media 2008, 426.

[2] Communication from the Commission of 24 May 2011, A Single Market for Intellectual Property Rights Boosting creativity and innovation to provide economic growth, high quality jobs and first class products and services in Europe, COM (2011) 287

Launch of the BU Open Access Publication Fund

Guidance, Publishing

open access logo, Public Library of ScienceBack in April it was announced that BU would be launching an Open Access Publication Fund in August 2011 (see the previous blog post here: BU’s open access publication fund to go live!).

Therefore, as of today BU officially operates a dedicated central Open Access Publication Fund (OAPF), launched in response to, and in support of, developments in research communication and publication trends. The fund is also to support research in complying with some of the major funding bodies who have introduced open access publishing requirements as a condition of their grants.

The fund is available for use by any BU author ready to submit a completed article for publication who wishes to make their output freely and openly accessible.

If you are interested in applying to the fund then you need to email Julie Northam in the Research Development Unit with the following information:

  • Name of the open access publication
  • Confirmation this will be a peer reviewed paper
  • A short justification (1 paragraph) of why it is beneficial for your research to be published in this particular open access publication
  • The cost of the open access publication
  • Likely publication date
  • Likely REF Unit of Assessment (UOA)
  • A copy of the paper

If you have any questions about the new OAPF then please direct them to me via email.

Further information:

Feedback, not failure…

Publishing

Prof Alan Fyall, Deputy Dean (Research and Enterprise) in the School of Tourism, discusses the experience of receiving reviewers’ comments…

After nearly 15 years of publishing in peer-reviewed academic journals I am sure I am not alone in still living in fear of emails containing the “feedback” from editors and reviewers of journals about my papers. Over the years, the inconsistency of reviewers’ comments never ceases to amaze me, while the often unhelpful and sometimes down right rude tone of some reviewers does make me sometimes beg the question …. why do I bother? After a “time out”, however, often a period of two-to-three days, upon revisiting the comments advanced I often, albeit reluctantly, accept that the two or three reviewers have probably made some good comments and that, if I calm down and just adhere to the questions raised, will generate a paper far superior to the one I first submitted. This is not always the case but more often than not reviewers do actually provide very honest, fair and helpful comments in an attempt to improve the quality of submissions. Yes, they can sometimes be pedantic, over-emphasise their own contribution and state the obvious. More often, however, they will provide a critical overview of the broad theme of the paper and its rationale, the methodology and sampling, presentation of findings and conclusions drawn, as well as an overview of the way in which the paper is organised and presented.

My advice to old and new researchers is quite simple. In the first instance, take a deep breath when opening that email, read its contents and then leave for a while and avoid at all costs a hasty and reactive response that will only make things worse. Secondly, accept that editors and reviewers are only human (well, most of them) and that what they are communicating is their views and opinions which most probably do not concur with yours and more often than not will conflict with those of other reviewers. Thirdly, take all the feedback provided and take time in amending your paper and the reply to editors and reviewers that explains exactly what changes have been made in improving the quality of your submission. Where you still disagree be constructive in your explanation and offer further insights that the reviewers may have missed in their interpretation of your work. Finally, resubmit your paper and promise to yourself that you bear no grudges against the editor and/or reviewers as you can normally guarantee that at some point in the future they will once again review your work and remember the professional manner in which you dealt with their feedback the first time. For me, after 15 years of publishing I am still learning, still amazed at some of the comments I receive and am still ……. slightly nervous about opening that email; a fear which is unlikely to vanish perhaps as we continue to learn and learn from others in our respective academic publishing journeys

HEFCE and RCUK work together on open access publishing

Publishing

open access logo, Public Library of ScienceHEFCE and Research Council UK (RCUK) have today committed to work together to make open access to published research a reality.

Open access publishing turns the traditional publishing route (readers paying subscriptions to publishers) on its head as researchers pay a fee to the publisher to publish their research and in turn the publisher makes the article available free of charge to readers immediately on publication. This enables research findings to be shared with a wider public audience thus increasing the visibility and potential impact/influence of the research findings.

Read the full story here – http://www.hefce.ac.uk/news/hefce/2011/rcuk.htm

BU has recently launched the BU Open Access Publication Fund. For further information read our previous post on the new fund.

Earlier this week SAS launched a short survey on attitudes towards open access publishing. Read more and take part in the survey here.

Perspectives in Public Health published by Sage

Publishing

Dr Health Heartwell, School of Health and Social Care, is the Honorary Editor for Perspectives in Public Health and is interested in receiving submissions for future issues of the journal.

Perspectives in Public Health is an indexed bi-monthly, multidisciplinary public health journal with a truly international scope. Featured in PubMed and ISI, Perspectives in Public Health publishes original peer-reviewed articles, literature reviews, research papers, and opinion pieces on all aspects of the science, philosophy, and practice of health promotion and public health.

2009 Impact Factor: 0.406 Ranked 63/95 in Public, Environmental and Occupational Health

Colleagues who have published have received interest from all parts of the globe and I would like to invite submissions for the themed issues in 2012:

January – Health Literacy

March – Olympic Legacy

July – Healthy Aging

September – Adolescent Health

November – Unthemed

January 2013 – Health Workforce

The current issue is now online at  http://rsh.sagepub.com