Category / Publishing

Paper with a difference

international, open access, Publishing, writing

Last night ResearchGate informed us that our paper ‘Understanding health education, health promotion and public health‘ had reached 6,000 reads [1].  This reflective paper in an Open Access journal tries to bring a little more clarity in the confusion around the difference between the concepts of health education, health promotion and public health. We argue that such confusion does not limit itself to the individual terms but also to how these terms relate to each other. Some authors and public health practitioners use terms such as health education and health promotion interchangeably; others see them clearly as different concepts.

In this theoretical overview paper, we have first of all outlined our understanding of these individual terms. We suggest how the five principles of health promotion as outlined by the World Health Organization (WHO) fit into Andrew Tannahill’s model from 2009 [2] of three overlapping areas: (a) health education; (b) prevention of ill health; and (c) health protection. Our schematic overview places health education within health promotion and health promotion itself in the center of the overarching disciplines of education and public health. We hope our representation helps reduce confusion among all those interested in our discipline, including students, educators, journalists, practitioners, policymakers, politicians, and researchers.

The paper is co-authored by a primary school teacher based in Dorset, and four professors who have a combined experience in the wider public health field of over a century.

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health

 

References:

  1. van Teijlingen, K., Devkota, B., Douglas, F., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2021) Understanding health education, health promotion and public health, Journal of Health Promotion 9(1):1-7.
  2. Tannahill, A. (2009). Health promotion: The Tannahill model revisited. Public Health, 123(5),396-399. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2008.05.021

Congratulations to Heidi Singelton & Steve Ersser

Publishing, writing

In late August Heidi Singleton led the publication of a Cochrane Systematic Review under the title ‘Educational and psychological interventions for managing atopic dermatitis (eczema)’ [1].  The team conducting this review includes BU’s Prof. Steve Ersser, University Hospitals Dorset NHS Foundation Trust colleagues Dr. Andrew Hodder, former BU staff Prof. Vanessa Heaslip (currently at the University of Salford), and one of my co-authors on a previous project Dr. Dwayne Boyers from the Health Economics Research Unit at the University of Aberdeen.

In their review the authors conclude that in-person, individual education, as an adjunct to conventional topical therapy, may reduce short-term eczema signs compared to standard care, but there is no information on eczema symptoms, quality of life or long-term outcomes. Group education probably reduces eczema signs and symptoms in the long term and may also improve quality of life in the short term. Favourable effects were also reported for technology-mediated education, habit reversal treatment and arousal reduction therapy. All favourable effects are of uncertain clinical significance, since they may not exceed the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the outcome measures used.  Finally, they found no trials of self-help psychological interventions, psychological therapies or printed education. Future trials should include more diverse populations, address shared priorities, evaluate long-term outcomes and ensure patients are involved in trial design.

 

Well done!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMWH

Reference:

  1. Singleton, H., Hodder, A., Almilaji, O., Ersser, S. J., Heaslip, V., O’Meara, S., Boyers, D., Roberts, A., Scott, H., Van Onselen, J., Doney, L., Boyle, R. J., & Thompson, A. R. (2024). Educational and psychological interventions for managing atopic dermatitis (eczema). The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 8(8), CD014932. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD014932.pub2

First EPPOCH study paper accepted for publication

open access, Publishing, writing

This afternoon the editorial office of Frontiers in Psychiatry informed us that our manuscript “Prenatal maternal mental health and resilience in the United Kingdom during the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: A cross-national comparison” [1] has been accepted for publication in Frontiers in Psychiatry, section Perinatal Psychiatry.   An interdisciplinary team from Germany, Canada and the UK designed and initiated a longitudinal pregnancy cohort in the United Kingdom titled Maternal mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: Effect of the Pandemic on Pregnancy Outcomes & Childhood Health (EPPOCH).    In the second half of  2020, we recruited 3,600 pregnant individuals via self-enrollment through our website ‘www.eppoch-uk.org’. Our EPPOCH study has since collected a wealth of validated questionnaire data at multiple time points, from mothers (during pregnancy and postpartum) and their children (from birth to age 3), and we are currently distributing our 4-year childhood follow-up questionnaire. This is the first paper from the EPPOCH study.

The UK team is a collaboration between Bournemouth University and University Hospitals Dorset NHS Foundation Trust, the latter through Professor Minesh Khashu and Dr. Latha Vinayakarao based in Poole Maternity Hospital. The German team is led by Dr. Melanie Conrad, previously at Charité University Medicine Berlin, and now associated with the University of Augsburg, and includes Swarali Datye, PhD student at Charité University Medicine Berlin, whilst our Canadian collaborator, Alison MacRae-Miller, is based at the University of British Columbia, Victoria.  This EPPOCH cohort is closely linked with a sister cohort in Canada called the Pregnancy During the Pandemic (PDP) study.

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health

 

 

Reference:

  1. Datye, S., Smiljanic, M., Shetti, R.H., MacRae-Miller, A., van Teijlingen, E., Vinayakarao, L., Peters, E.M.J., Lebel, C.A., Tomfohr-Madsen, L., Giesbrecht, G., Khashu, M., Conrad, M.L. (2024) Prenatal maternal mental health and resilience in the United Kingdom during the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: A cross-national comparison, Frontiers in Psychiatry, (accepted).

Iridescent Spider Webs: BU NCCA Undergraduate Student Success at SIGGRAPH’24

conferences, Publishing, REF Subjects, staff profile pages, Student Engagement, student research

The 51st International Conference & Exhibition on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH’24), the international annual conference for the Special Interest Group on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques of the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM, the world’s foremost computing society) was held in Denver, Colorado in August.

Among the work showcased at the conference was the poster “O, What an Iridescent Web We Weave: Rendering Physically Inspired Spider Webs for Visual Effects” by Vaya Simeonova (Grigorova) from this year’s graduating cohort (Computer Animation Technical Arts – CATA, Level 6) of the National Centre for Computer Animation (NCCA, Faculty of Media and Communication) and co-authored by Dr Eike Falk Anderson.

Poster presented at SIGGRAPH’24

The poster paper is based on Vaya’s final year Research & Development Project unit project “An Exploration of the Optical Properties of Spider Web Fibres”, which resulted in the development of a physically inspired method for rendering CG spider webs that display the iridescent properties, observable in real-world spider webs.

The method achieves this in a manner that does not require a computationally expensive and bespoke/proprietary software solution, but instead works with industry standard, off-the-shelf, visual effects (VFX) software, meaning it can effortlessly be integrated into existing VFX production pipelines. The project was also one of five submissions featured in the SIGGRAPH’24 “Posters Highlights” video.

After being accepted as one of the 70 posters presented at this year’s SIGGRAPH conference, the world’s Premier Conference & Exhibition on Computer Graphics & Interactive Techniques, Vaya’s contribution (poster 32), was invited to the first round of the prestigious ACM Student Research Competition (SRC) sponsored by Microsoft, shortlisted as a semi-finalists, and presented to a panel of experts in the SRC Final Presentation. The jury, who enjoyed Vaya’s presentation and appreciated her demonstrated knowledge of prior research, were impressed by her execution of the work and its practicality, for which they awarded Vaya the Second Place in the ACM SIGGRAPH 2024 Student Research Competition in the undergraduate category.

Vaya Simeonova, presenting her poster (2nd place SRC, undergraduate category) at SIGGRAPH'24

After Ben Knowles (with Dr Oleg Fryazinov) who was awarded second place at SIGGRAPH’15 for “Increasing realism of animated grass in real-time game environments“, Teemu Lindborg and Philip Gifford (with Dr Oleg Fryazinov) who were semi-finalists at SIGGRAPH’17 for “Interactive parameterised heterogeneous 3D modelling with signed distance fields”, Quentin Corker-Marin (with Dr Valery Adzhiev and the late Professor Alexander Pasko) who achieved second place at SIGGRAPH’17 for “Space-time cubification of artistic shapes“, Bianca Cirdei (with Dr Eike Falk Anderson) who was awarded 1st place at SIGGRAPH’18 for her exceptional project “Withering fruits: vegetable matter decay and fungus growth” and Laura Mann (with Dr Oleg Fryazinov) who won second place at SIGGRAPH’19 for “3D printing for mixed reality hands-on museum exhibit interaction“, this is the first time since the start of the COVID’19 pandemic that an NCCA undergraduate student has progressed to the final round in this prestigious competition.

New midwifery publication

NHS, PG research, Publishing, writing

Congratulations to Ph.D. student Joanne Rack on the publication today of her paper ‘Understanding perceptions and communication of risk in advanced maternal age: a scoping review (protocol) on women’s engagement with health care services’  [1].   Joanne is currently doing a Clinical Doctorate in the Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health (CMWH) focusing on personalised care for women of advanced maternal age.  Her doctoral study is matched-funded by University Hospitals Dorset NHS Foundation Trust and Bournemouth University [BU].  Her PhD is supervised and supported by Profs. Vanora Hundley, Ann Luce and Edwin van Teijlingen at BU and Dr. Latha Vinayakarao in Poole Maternity Hospital.

Well done!

 

Reference:

  1. Rack, J., Hundley, V., van Teijlingen, E., Luce, A., Vinayakarao. L. (2024) Understanding perceptions and communication of risk in advanced maternal age: a scoping review (protocol) on women’s engagement with health care services, MIDIRS Midwifery Digest, 34(3): 201-204.

New qualitative research methods paper now online

Fusion themes, international, open access, Publishing, Training, writing

I am delighted to share that our most recent methods paper in the International Journal of Qualitative Methods entitled “Most Significant Change Approach: A Guide to Assess the Programmatic Effects” [1] is now published and is available online (click here!).  This paper is co-authored by Mohan K. Sharma, Shanti P. Khanal and Edwin R.van Teijlingen.

The paper outlines the so-called ‘Most Significant Change’ (MSC) participatory technique to monitor and evaluate programmatic effects. MSC is a form of monitoring that can be applied throughout the programme cycle and it provides information to help manage the programme. Furthermore, MSC as an evaluation method, provides stories from which programmes’ overall impact can be assessed. However, MSC, as a participatory evaluation technique using qualitative approaches, is often neglected by many evaluators.

 

This is the latest in a series of papers describing the strengths and weaknesses of applying specific research approaches.  Other recent methods papers included two on positionality [2-3], a paper on interview methods [4], reflections on conducting participatory policy analysis in Nepal [5], some considerations about the selection of study localities in health research [6], distinguishing between methods and methodology [7], the use of the appreciative inquiry methods [8], reflections on interdisciplinary research [9], and patient and public involvement in research in Bangladesh and Nepal [10].

Whilst older methods papers published Faculty of Health & Social Sciences academics include topics such as focus group discussions, working with translators, conducting pilot studies, the Delphi Method, comparative studies, and qualitative interviews [11-22].

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMWH

 

References:

  1. Sharma, M.K., Khanal, S.P., van Teijlingen E. (2024) Most Significant Change Approach: A Guide to Assess the Programmatic Effects, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/16094069241272143
  2. Gurr, H., Oliver, L., Harvey, O., Subedi, M., van Teijlingen, E. (2024) Positionality in Qualitative Research, Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology & Anthropology 18(1): 48-54. https://doi.org/10.3126/dsaj.v18i01.67553
  3. Thapa, R., Regmi, P., van Teijlingen, E., Heaslip, V. (2023) Researching Dalits and health care: Considering positionality, Health Prospect 21(1): 6-8.
  4. Harvey, O., van Teijlingen, E., Parrish, M. (2024) Using a range of communication tools to interview a hard-to-reach population, Sociological Research Online 29(1): 221–232 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/13607804221142212
  5. Sapkota, S., Rushton, S., van Teijlingen, E., Subedi, M., Balen, J., Gautam, S., Adhikary, P., Simkhada, P., Wasti,SP., Karki, JK., Panday, S., Karki, A., Rijal, B., Joshi, S., Basnet, S., Marahatta, SB. (2024) Participatory policy analysis in health policy and systems research: reflections from a study in Nepal. Health Research & Policy Systems, 22(7) https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-023-01092-5 .
  6. Wasti, S.P., van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P., Rushton, S., Balen, J., Subedi, M., Karki, J., Adhikary, P., Sapkota, S., Gautam, S., Marahatta, S., Panday, S., Bajracharya, B., Vaidya, A. for the Nepal Federal Health System Team (2023) Selection of Study Sites and Participants for Research into Nepal’s Federal Health System, WHO South-East Asia Journal of Public Health
  7. Harvey, O., Regmi, P.R., Mahato, P., Dhakal Adhikari, S., Dhital, R., van Teijlingen E. (2023) Methods or Methodology: Terms That Are Too Often Confused. Journal of Education & Research, 13(2): 94-105. https://doi.org/10.51474/jer.v13i2.716
  8. Arnold, R., Gordon, C., Way, S., Mahato, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2022) Why use Appreciative Inquiry? Lessons learned during COVID-19 in a UK maternity service, European Journal of Midwifery 6 (May): 1-7. https://doi.org/10.18332/ejm/147444
  9. Shanker, S., Wasti, S.P., Ireland, J., Regmi, P., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2021) The Interdisciplinary Team Not the Interdisciplinarist: Reflections on Interdisciplinary Research, Europasian Journal of Medical Sciences 3(2): 1-5. https://doi.org/10.46405/ejms.v3i2.317
  10. Simkhada, B., van Teijlingen, E., Nadeem, A., Green, S., Warren A. (2021) Importance of involving patients and public in health research in Bangladesh and Nepal. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 37: e10. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462320000811
  11. Kirkpatrick, P., van Teijlingen E. (2009) Lost in Translation: Reflecting on a Model to Reduce Translation and Interpretation Bias, The Open Nursing Journal, 3(8): 25-32 web address: bentham.org/open/tonursj/openaccess2.htm
  12. van Teijlingen E, Hundley, V. (2005) Pilot studies in family planning & reproductive health care, Journal of Family Planning & Reproductive Health Care 31(3): 219-21.
  13. van Teijlingen E, Pitchforth E. (2006) Focus Group Research Family Planning & Reproductive Health Care, Journal of Family Planning & Reproductive Health Care 32(1): 30-2
  14. van Teijlingen E, Pitchforth, E., Bishop, C., Russell, E.M. (2006) Delphi method and nominal group techniques in family planning and reproductive health research, Journal of Family Planning & Reproductive Health Care 32(4): 249-252.
  15. Pitchforth, E, van Teijlingen E, Ireland, J. (2007) Focusing the group, RCM Midwives Journal 10(2): 78-80.
  16. Pitchforth, E., van Teijlingen E. (2005) International Public Health Research involving interpreters: a case study approach from Bangladesh, BMC Public Health, 5: 71 Web address: http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2458-5-71.pdf
  17. Forrest Keenan, K., Teijlingen van, E., Pitchforth, E. (2005) Analysis of qualitative research data in family planning & reproductive health care, Journal of Family Planning & Reproductive Health Care 31(1): 40-43.
  18. Brindle S, Douglas, F, van Teijlingen E., Hundley V. (2005) Midwifery Research: Questionnaire surveys, RCM Midwives Journal 8 (4): 156-158.
  19. Douglas, F, van Teijlingen E, Brindle S, Hundley, V, Bruce, J., Torrance, N. (2005) Designing Questionnaires for Midwifery Research, RCM Midwives Journal 8: 212-215.
  20. van Teijlingen E Ireland, J. (2003) Research interviews in midwifery RCM Midwives Journal 6: 260-63. http://www.midwives.co.uk/default.asp?chid=439&editorial_id=13768
  21. van Teijlingen E, Sandall, J., Wrede, S., Benoit, C., DeVries, R., Bourgeault, I. (2003) Comparative studies in maternity care RCM Midwives Journal 6: 338-40.
  22. van Teijlingen E, Hundley, V. (2002) ‘The importance of pilot studies’ Nursing Standard 16(40): 33-36. Web: nursing-standard.co.uk/archives/vol16-40/pdfs/vol16w40p3336.pdf

BU e-health paper read 4,000 times

international, Publishing, Women's Academic Network, writing

Our paper ‘Midwives’ views towards women using mHealth and eHealth to self-monitor their pregnancy: A systematic review of the literature’ [1] reached 4,000 reads on ResearchGate today.  Obviously, there is a growing interest in the use of mobile apps as well as the more general application of mHealth and eHealth in the UK and elsewhere.

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health

Reference:

  1. Vickery, M., van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Smith, G. B., Way, S., Westwood, G. (2020). Midwives’ views towards women using mHealth and eHealth to self-monitor their pregnancy: A systematic review of the literature. European Journal of Midwifery, 4: 1-11. https://doi.org/10.18332/ejm/126625

Request for your paper: A historical perspective

international, open access, Publishing, REF Subjects

Any publishing academic will irregularly receive emails for copies of their papers, usually for papers which researchers or students can’t access through their own institution.  Different universities have different expensive deals with publishers, and especially for universities in low-income countries this can be very limiting.  Apart from requests for papers I also receive email requests for book chapter which are part of commercial textbooks, or people asking for a PDF, i.e. a free electronic copy, of the whole textbook.  Recently I have also had a couple of requests for papers which are already freely available as Open Access publications.  I assume the latter are simply requests from lazy students, who searched a bibliographic data base found several (many?) relevant papers.  Without too much thinking they send quick automated email through ResearchGate, which is less work that searching for each actual Open Access paper online.

It did not always use to be that easy to approach an academic for a copy of their scientific paper.  When I started as a PhD student, before the widespread use of the internet, if your university library did not have a subscription to the journal you were looking for, you would write a short letter to an academic author, post the letter, and if your were lucky, receive a printed copy of the requested paper in the post a few weeks later. The more established academics would have pre-printed postcards to speed up the process of requesting an academic paper.  The photo of the 1959 (for the record this was before I was born!) shows one of such cards from a doctor based in the Netherlands.  The effort involved meant you asked only for papers you were pretty sure where central to your research, you would not do the equivalent of sending out 40 emails, hoping to get PDFs of six or seven papers relevant to your essay topic.

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMWH

Delegation in Healthcare book: BU writing opportunity

Publishing, writing

BLOG delegation

Rowena Slope and Lucy Stainer are leading a unique writing opportunity for BU staff to join their writing team for the Delegation in Healthcare book, which has a publishing agreement with the Taylor & Francis Group. Your contribution could make a significant difference in the field of healthcare delegation.
 – Do you have case studies/ experiences that can be used in this book?
 – Do you have research/ literature on delegation?
If it’s ‘yes’ to either of these questions and you would be willing to share or would like to join our writing team (current membership is Teresa Burdett, Emily Brooks, Joanna Cleall, Chantel Cox, Alex Hull, Ursula Rolfe & Clare Shearer), please get in touch with us via email: lstainer@bournemouth.ac.uk
We’re excited about the possibility of including your work and expertise in our book, and we would love to hear from you.
(more…)