Category / Research assessment

It’s INTERNATIONAL OPEN ACCESS WEEK!!

BU research, Guidance, Publishing, Research assessment

Yes it’s here again that joyful time of the year when we highlight and discuss all things open access. First up is a quick reminder…

 

What is Open Access?

Open access is about making the products of research freely accessible to all. It allows research to be disseminated quickly and widely, the research process to operate more efficiently, and increased use and understanding of research by business, government, charities and the wider public.

There are two complementary mechanisms for achieving open access to research.

The first mechanism is for authors to publish in open-access journals that do not receive income through reader subscriptions.

The second is for authors to deposit their refereed journal article in an open electronic archive.

These two mechanisms are often called the ‘gold’ and ‘green’ routes to open access:

  • Gold – This means publishing in a way that allows immediate access to everyone electronically and free of charge. Publishers can recoup their costs through a number of mechanisms, including through payments from authors called article processing charges (APCs), or through advertising, donations or other subsidies.
  • Green – This means depositing the final peer-reviewed research output in an electronic archive called a repository. Repositories can be run by the researcher’s institution, but shared or subject repositories are also commonly used. Access to the research output can be granted either immediately or after an agreed embargo period.

Article first published – http://www.hefce.ac.uk/rsrch/oa/whatis/

To encourage all academic communities to consider open access publishing, Authors Alliance has produced a comprehensive ‘Understanding Open Access‘ guide which addresses common open access related questions and concerns and provides real-life strategies and tools that authors can use to work with publishers, institutions, and funders to make their works more widely accessible to all.

To access and download the guide, please follow this link – http://authorsalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/Documents/Guides/Authors%20Alliance%20-%20Understanding%20Open%20Access.pdf

More information on Open Access Week and activities happening across the world can be found here – http://www.openaccessweek.org/ 

ECR representative needed to join the REF Circumstances Board

BU research, ECR Network, REF Subjects, Research assessment, Research Training

The BU REF Circumstances Board has been established to oversee the individual staff circumstances process for REF 2021. This includes:

  • determining whether individual staff circumstances submitted by BU academics meet the REF eligibility requirements;
  • verifying the evidence provided;
  • calculating the reduction in outputs using the methodology set out in the REF guidance documentation and the Advance HE case studies;
  • contributing to BU’s culture of equality, diversity and inclusivity.

The Board is chaired by a HR Manager with support from the Equality and Diversity Adviser and a member of Research Development & Support. These post-holders will be selected based on their prior knowledge and expertise in individual staff circumstances and equality and diversity issues. Membership will also include two academics and an early career researcher (ECR).

We are now seeking expressions of interest from academics who are interested in joining the Circs Board. Successful applicants will be required to attend meetings of the BU REF Circumstances Board (schedule tbc, but likely to be one or two meetings per year), ensure they are aware of the REF guidance and regulations, undertake equality and diversity training, and promote a positive culture of equality and diversity at BU. We therefore ask for your commitment, active contribution and, most importantly, confidentiality due to the sensitive work of the Board. In return you will be involved in an important cross-University committee, gain an insight into the REF and equality and diversity (both highly topical issues in the sector), and be engaged in academic citizenship.

Nomination procedure:

The vacant roles on the BU REF Circumstances Board are:

  • 2 x academic representatives
  • 1 x early career researcher (ECR) representative

Anyone interested should submit an expression of interest stating your interest in equality and diversity, why you think equality and diversity is important for the REF and why your involvement would strengthen the BU REF Circumstances Board (max 300 words). You must also state whether you are applying to be an academic member or an ECR. Your nomination should state your name, job title and Faculty.

The deadline for expressions of interest is Friday 20th September. Nominations should be emailed to ref@bournemouth.ac.uk. Note – There is training and development scheduled on the 26th September which it is hoped successful members will be able to attend.

Expressions of interest will be reviewed by a panel of reviewers who are responsible for agreeing on which applicants to invite to serve on the BU REF Circumstances Board.

Eligibility:

Applications are invited from any BU staff member on an academic contract, however, you must be independent from REF preparations (for example, applicants cannot be UOA Leaders, impact champions or output champions).

ECRs in this context are defined as members of staff who started their careers as independent researchers on or after 1 August 2016. In line with the REF guidance, an individual is deemed to have started their career as an independent researcher from the point at which:

  1. They held a contract of employment (0.2 FTE or higher) which included a primary employment function of undertaking ‘research’ or ‘teaching and research’, with any HEI or other organisation, whether in the UK or overseas, and
  2. They undertook independent research, for example, leading or acting as principal investigator or equivalent on a research grant or significant piece of research work.

If you have any queries, please speak with Shelly Anne Stringer in the first instance.

Expressions of Interest invited from academics to join the BU REF Circumstances Board

BU research, ECR Network, Research assessment

The BU REF Circumstances Board has been established to oversee the individual staff circumstances process for REF 2021. This includes:

  • determining whether individual staff circumstances submitted by BU academics meet the REF eligibility requirements;
  • verifying the evidence provided;
  • calculating the reduction in outputs using the methodology set out in the REF guidance documentation and the Advance HE case studies;
  • contributing to BU’s culture of equality, diversity and inclusivity.

The Board is chaired by a HR Manager with support from the Equality and Diversity Adviser and a member of Research Development & Support. These post-holders will be selected based on their prior knowledge and expertise in individual staff circumstances and equality and diversity issues. Membership will also include two academics and an early career researcher (ECR).

We are now seeking expressions of interest from academics who are interested in joining the Circs Board. Successful applicants will be required to attend meetings of the BU REF Circumstances Board (schedule tbc, but likely to be one or two meetings per year), ensure they are aware of the REF guidance and regulations, undertake equality and diversity training, and promote a positive culture of equality and diversity at BU. We therefore ask for your commitment, active contribution and, most importantly, confidentiality due to the sensitive work of the Board. In return you will be involved in an important cross-University committee, gain an insight into the REF and equality and diversity (both highly topical issues in the sector), and be engaged in academic citizenship.

Nomination procedure:

The vacant roles on the BU REF Circumstances Board are:

  • 2 x academic representatives
  • 1 x early career researcher (ECR) representative

Anyone interested should submit an expression of interest stating your interest in equality and diversity, why you think equality and diversity is important for the REF and why your involvement would strengthen the BU REF Circumstances Board (max 300 words). You must also state whether you are applying to be an academic member or an ECR. Your nomination should state your name, job title and Faculty.

The deadline for expressions of interest is Friday 20th September. Nominations should be emailed to ref@bournemouth.ac.uk. Note – There is training and development scheduled on the 26th September which it is hoped successful members will be able to attend.

Expressions of interest will be reviewed by a panel of reviewers who are responsible for agreeing on which applicants to invite to serve on the BU REF Circumstances Board.

Eligibility:

Applications are invited from any BU staff member on an academic contract, however, you must be independent from REF preparations (for example, applicants cannot be UOA Leaders, impact champions or output champions).

ECRs in this context are defined as members of staff who started their careers as independent researchers on or after 1 August 2016. In line with the REF guidance, an individual is deemed to have started their career as an independent researcher from the point at which:

  1. They held a contract of employment (0.2 FTE or higher) which included a primary employment function of undertaking ‘research’ or ‘teaching and research’, with any HEI or other organisation, whether in the UK or overseas, and
  2. They undertook independent research, for example, leading or acting as principal investigator or equivalent on a research grant or significant piece of research work.

If you have any queries, please speak with Shelly Anne Stringer in the first instance.

BU REF 2021 Code of Practice – staff feedback exercise – deadline Tuesday 10 September

BU research, Research assessment

The deadline to provide feedback on the BU REF 2021 draft code of practice is 5pm on Tuesday.

The Research Excellence Framework (REF) is the system for assessing research in UK higher education institutions HEIs.

Institutions making a submission to the REF 2021 are required to develop, document and apply a code of practice on identifying staff with significant responsibility for research, determining who is an independent researcher and the selection of outputs in their REF submissions.

BU held a comprehensive staff engagement exercise in April 2019 and received agreement from staff representative groups for the Code of Practice submitted in June 2019. UKRI have since asked us to revise and resubmit our REF Code of Practice. In light of these changes, staff are invited to read and comment upon the revised BU REF 2021 draft code of practice, prior to the final revised draft being submitted to UKRI for approval.

The revised draft code of practice, a briefing paper (including equality analysis), a feedback form are available from the BU Staff Intranet:

https://staffintranet.bournemouth.ac.uk/news/news/thismonth/buref2021codeofpractice-stafffeedbackexercise.php

The exercise is open for feedback until Tuesday 10 September 5pm.

BU REF 2021 Code of Practice – staff feedback exercise

BU research, REF Subjects, Research assessment

The Research Excellence Framework (REF) is the system for assessing research in UK higher education institutions HEIs.

Institutions making a submission to the REF 2021 are required to develop, document and apply a code of practice on identifying staff with significant responsibility for research, determining who is an independent researcher and the selection of outputs in their REF submissions.

BU held a comprehensive staff engagement exercise in April 2019 and received agreement from staff representative groups for the Code of Practice submitted in June 2019. UKRI have since asked us to revise and resubmit our REF Code of Practice. In light of these changes, staff are invited to read and comment upon the revised BU REF 2021 draft code of practice, prior to the final revised draft being submitted to UKRI for approval.

The revised draft code of practice, a briefing paper (including equality analysis) amd feedback form are available from the BU Staff Intranet:

https://staffintranet.bournemouth.ac.uk/news/news/thismonth/buref2021codeofpractice-stafffeedbackexercise.php 

The exercise is open for feedback until Tuesday 10 September 5pm.

Research Events in July

BU research, Events, REF Subjects, Research assessment, Research Training, writing

Preparing Practice-Based Research Outputs for Assessment (REF 2021)

Wednesday 17th July 11:00 – 15:30 on Talbot Campus

The focus of this session will be on :

  • The information to include in your submission, and how it is presented
  • Looking at worked examples – good and bad practice
  • Providing individual support

By the end of this workshop you will have knowledge of the information which reviewers need in order assess research outputs, and how this should be presented to reviewers. You will also have made progress in developing the supporting information for outputs due to be submitted in future REF Mock exercises.

See here for more details and to book.

Research Outputs Writing Days

The Research Outputs Writing Days are very popular. These aim to give authors time and space with like minded individuals to produce publications , and provide insights and tips into how to manage writing time within daily routine.

The event on Tuesday 16th July is now fully booked, but the next is on Thursday 5th September. See here for to book and for details of other dates.

BU REF 2021 Code of Practice – staff feedback exercise – deadline Friday 2 May

Research assessment

The deadline to provide feedback on the BU REF 2021 draft code of practice is 5pm on Friday

The Research Excellence Framework (REF) is the system for assessing research in UK higher education institutions HEIs. Institutions making a submission to the REF 2021 are required to develop, document and apply a code of practice on identifying staff with significant responsibility for research, determining who is an independent researcher and the selection of outputs in their REF submissions.

Staff are invited to read and comment upon the BU REF 2021 draft code of practice, prior to the final draft being submitted to UKRI for approval.

The draft code of practice, a briefing paper (including equality analysis) and a feedback form are available from the BU Staff Intranet: https://staffintranet.bournemouth.ac.uk/news/news/thismonth/buref2021codeofpractice-stafffeedbackexercise.php

BU REF 2021 Code of Practice – staff feedback exercise

Research assessment

The Research Excellence Framework (REF) is the system for assessing research in UK higher education institutions HEIs. Institutions making a submission to the REF 2021 are required to develop, document and apply a code of practice on identifying staff with significant responsibility for research, determining who is an independent researcher and the selection of outputs in their REF submissions.

Staff are invited to read and comment upon the BU REF 2021 draft code of practice, prior to the final draft being submitted to UKRI for approval.

The draft code of practice, a briefing paper (including equality analysis), a feedback form and details of the open Q&A sessions are available from the BU Staff Intranet: https://staffintranet.bournemouth.ac.uk/news/news/thismonth/buref2021codeofpractice-stafffeedbackexercise.php

The exercise is open for feedback until Friday 3 May.

Call for EoIs: Unit of Assessment (UOA) Leader for UOA 17 to drive REF 2021 preparations

BU research, REF Subjects, Research assessment

BU is preparing submissions for units of assessment (UOAs) for REF 2021. Preparation for each UOA is led by a UOA Leader who is supported by an Impact Champion and an Output Champion. From March 2018, UOA Leaders are recruited via an open and transparent process. All academic staff have the opportunity to put themselves forward for UOA Leader roles. The roles are until December 2020.

We are currently seeking expressions of interest (EoIs) from academic staff interested in leading preparations for one UOA:

  • Business and Management Studies

UOA Leaders serve a term up to December 2020, although they can choose to step down during this time. The UOA Leader undertakes a vital role in driving and delivering BU’s REF submission, influencing the University’s preparations, shaping optimal submissions for each UOA and ultimately having a significant effect on BU’s REF 2021 results.

Key responsibilities of the UOA Leader role include:

  • Providing leadership, advice and support on all issues relating to research planning, impact, performance metrics and published guidance relating to the UOA
  • Considering the widest available staff pool for the UOA and present these options to the REF Committee (being mindful of where this potentially impacts upon other UOAs)
  • Having an institutional outlook for the REF, i.e. aiming to optimise BU’s overall REF performance
  • Optimising the UOA submission and that of related UOAs by working to mitigate weaknesses and to highlight strengths across all aspects of the submission
  • Ensuring that outputs undergo rigorous review, internally and externally in order to assess quality prior to inclusion for REF
  • Working with Impact champions and the Impact Working Group to understand the interrelationship of case study quality, selection, placement and staff numbers for the UOA
  • Leading on REF communications within departments represented in the UOA and be the key point of contact and advice with regard to the UOA for Heads of research entities, DDRPPs and Executive Deans
  • Working closely with RKEO who are managing the central REF preparation and submission process
  • Attend the REF Committee meetings

Being a UOA Leader is a big commitment and is recognised accordingly. UOA Leaders are given time to attend meetings and take responsibility for tasks. As such potential applicants should discuss their workload balance with their Head of Department before applying.

 

Application process:

To apply for either role, please submit a short statement (suggested length 300 words) stating which role you are interested in and explaining your interest in the role and what you could bring to it. This should be sent by email to Julie Northam by 5pm on Monday 25th March 2018.

The EoIs will be reviewed by a gender balanced panel comprising a DDRPP and a member of the professoriate. Applicants successful at this stage will be invited to an interview with the same panel.

The selection criteria used at EoI and interview stage are outlined below. Each criterion carries a total possible score of 5. The role will be offered to the highest scoring applicant. A member of the panel will provide feedback to all applicants.

  • Commitment, motivation and enthusiasm (scored out of 5): Being a UOA Leader is a big commitment. UOA Leaders need to be willing and able to make this commitment. They need to be enthusiastic about the REF and boosting research performance.
  • Skills and knowledge (scored out of 5): UOA Leaders should bring with them skills and knowledge to optimise BU’s REF preparations and submission (e.g. knowledge of the REF process, expertise in research metrics, leadership experience, knowledge about impact, experience of writing and delivering research strategies, etc).
  • Plans for preparing the UOA submission and awareness of the potential challenges and opportunities UOA Leaders are responsible for driving and delivering the UOA’s submission to REF 2021 whilst also maintaining an institutional outlook to optimise BU’s overall REF performance. They should have ideas for how they will do this and the potential challenges and opportunities of this, specific to the UOA.

 

Questions:

Questions regarding the process should be directed to Julie Northam (Head of RKEO).

UOA-specific questions should be directed to Prof. Mike Silk (Deputy Dean for Research in Mgmt)

Training opportunity – completing and submitting your IRAS application

BU research, Clinical Governance, data management, NHS, Research assessment, Research Ethics, Research Training, Training

Are you currently in the process of designing, setting up or planning your research study, and would like to extend your project into the NHS?

Yes? Then you may want to take advantage of this training opportunity.

Oliver Hopper (Research & Development Coordinator, Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospital) and Suzy Wignall (Clinical Governance Advisor, RDS)  will be running a training session on how to use, and complete your own application within the IRAS system.

IRAS (Integrated Research Application System) is the system used to gain approvals from the NHS Research Ethics Committee and Health Research Authority, before rolling out your study to NHS Trusts. To support this, the session will include the background to research ethics and the approvals required for NHS research.

The session will also be interactive, and so as participants, you will have the opportunity to go through the form itself and complete the sections, with guidance on what the reviewers are expecting to see in your answers, and tips on how to best use the system.

The training will take place in Studland House – Lansdowne Campus, room 102 Thursday 28th March at 09:30am – 12:30pm.

Get in touch with Research Ethics if you would like to register your interest and book a place.

Call for EoIs: Unit of Assessment (UOA) Impact Champion for UOA 24 to drive REF 2021 preparations

BU research, Impact, Research assessment, Research news

BU is preparing submissions for units of assessment (UOAs) for REF 2021. Each UoA has a UoA Leader, supported by an Impact Champion and Outputs Champion.  The roles are recruited through an open and transparent process, which gives all academic staff the opportunity to put themselves forward for UOA roles.

We are currently seeking an expression of interest (EoI) from academic staff interested in supporting impact development for UoA24 (Sport and Exercise Sciences, Leisure and Tourism).

Impact Champions play a key role in shaping the impact element of their UoA’s submission.  They work closely with their Faculty’s Impact Officer and Impact Post-Doctoral Researcher, where relevant.

Key responsibilities of the Impact Champion role include:

  • Review the development of impact case studies being prepared within the UOA
  • Provide guidance on how impact case studies can be accelerated and evidenced
  • Advise colleagues on the REF impact guidelines
  • Review impact strategies related to the UOA and assess progress made against them
  • Review and implement recommendations from external research users to strengthen research impact
  • Ensure that colleagues are updating institutional systems for impact tracking
  • Promote relevant training and development opportunities
  • Review impact arising from major programmes of research and knowledge exchange to make recommendations as to how these can contribute to impact case studies
  • Advise on the use of appropriate metrics specific to the subject area
  • To undertake any other duties as requested by the relevant Deputy Dean for Research and Professional Practice (DDRPP) and/or Unit of Assessment leader.

The full role description can be found here.

Application process:

To apply for the role, please submit a short statement (suggested length 300 words) explaining your interest in the role and what you could bring to it. This should be sent by email to Professor Tim Rees by Friday 15 March.  The EoIs will be reviewed by the UoA Leader and current Impact Champion.

The selection criteria used at EoI are outlined below. Each criterion carries a total possible score of 5. The role will be offered to the highest scoring applicant. The UoA Leader or current Impact Champion will provide feedback to all applicants.

  • Knowledge of the REF and research impact (scored out of 5): Applicants should have the appropriate level of skill and knowledge to help them support the development of impact in their UoA. It is expected that Impact Champions will predominantly be practising researchers and will have a breadth of understanding of research across their Faculty.  They are also expected to have an understanding of the REF assessment process and of research impact.
  • Experience of external engagement and / or impact development (scored out of 5): Impact Champions are expected to be able to provide advice and direction to colleagues who want to develop their research impact. Experience of engaging with external organisations or developing your own research impact would be of benefit in this role.
  • Commitment, motivation and enthusiasm (scored out of 5): Being an Impact Champion is a big commitment and the role has the scope to help shape impact development at BU. Applicants need to be committed to the role, as well as showing the enthusiasm and motivation needed to support their UoA.

HRA responds to paper outlining concerns over study set-up delays

Clinical Governance, data management, NHS, Research assessment, Research Ethics, Research Integritiy, Research news

Two researchers from the University of Cambridge recently published an article in which they expressed their concerns over the ethics review and study set-up of a project, that was submitted in 2013.

Their study wished to recruit healthcare staff, which under the current system only requires HRA approval and not NHS Research Ethics Approval. However at the time of this study’s set-up, NHS Research Ethics clearance was a requirement.

Here are a few figures from the article which highlight the inadequacies of the previous system, that researchers had to navigate to undertake NHS-based clinical research.

  • Approx. 89 individuals were involved in the study approvals;
  • 81 named individuals were communicated with regarding ethics and governance approval via email, telephone or in person;
  • 35 of the research participants were healthcare employees, translating to approx. 2 approvers per participant;
  • 491 exhanges took place with the 89 individuals, generating 193 pages of text.

Even though the above are rather off-putting, the Health Research Authority approval system has substantially improved timelines, efficiency and support for researchers and applicants. The new procedure was introduced in April 2016.
Now when you liaise with the HRA and Research Ethics Committee, you have one named contact for each team – a HRA Assessor and the REC Manager.

You can read the HRA’s response here, which signposts the reader to further resources.

Likewise at BU, dedicated support is on offer if you are thinking of introducing your own research idea into the NHS – email Research Ethics for advice and take a look at the Clinical Governance blog for guidance, further reading and regular updates.

REF Week: BU REF Outputs Committee and bibliographic databases

BU research, REF Subjects, Research assessment

Photo by Shalaka Gamage on Unsplash

BU, like other UK universities, has a support network to help staff prepare for REF 2021. Much of this support centres around three REF categories: Outputs, Impact and Environment. For the past few years I have been chairing the BU REF Outputs Sub-Committee. The committee considers what academics could be doing to maximise their individual outputs and UoAs to maximise the submission of outputs across staff; it also oversees that all outputs are compliant with the requirements for REF submission.

In the latter capacity, the Outputs Sub-Committee oversees the BU Open Access fund to enable staff to publish in Open Access journals that require the payment of a publication fee. One of the key tasks of the committee is to promote REF amongst BU staff, to make sure it is high upon everyone’s agenda, or at least on those members of staff likely to be submitted.

The committee members share ideas and good practice across UoAs. As the different UoAs are of different sizes (in terms of number of staff and hence outputs required) and at different stages of readiness, there is a lot of potential for learning across UoAs. The membership of this committee comprises the Output Champions for all the UoAs to which BU is likely to submit in November 2020. The committee is expertly organised by Shelly Anne Stringer, who makes my life as Chair so much easier.

One issue currently playing is REF2021 changing from using SCOPUS (Elsevier) in REF 2014 as its designated database for ‘checking’ publication data of submissions to Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics). This is particularly important for UoAs in Main Panel A and some in Main Panel B; for BU that is definitely UoA3, UoA4 and UoA11. One would expect that one bibliographic data base is very much like the next one, but nothing is further from the truth.

Knowing that SCOPUS and Web of Science record different outputs, the Outputs Committee approached BU library to investigate. The Academic Liaison Librarian, Caspian Dugdale, took my name as a case study just before Christmas and searched for the various permutations of my name on academic publications. For example, on Scopus there are currently 10 variations on my name. The first finding was that there were 256 publications listed for me on SCOPUS but only 187 on Web of Science. When Caspian compared the two bibliographic datasets, he also discovered that 112 publications were unique to SCOPUS, the larger dataset, but even more interesting perhaps is the finding that 52 records of outputs were unique to Web of Science.

On closer examination, not all records were unique as some simply listed differently on the two databases when attempting to remove duplicate records these were not recognised in the system as duplicates. However, some were unique records, as I had been keeping an eye on my SCOPUS registration since REF 2014 there was nothing new there, but I did pick up two new publications, one from 2013 and one from 2014, that I did not previously know about. Unfortunately, both are half-page conference presentations published in an academic journal long after the conference and both conferences were already listed on my CV.

The main message is that Web of Science appears to be less complete than SCOPUS and that we need to keep a close eye on it to ensure all relevant BU publications are properly recorded.

By Professor Edwin van Teijlingen, Chair of the BU Outputs Sub-Committee

Want to know more?

For more details about how citations data will be used in REF2021, see p.50 of the REF Panel Criteria and Working Methods and p.66 of the REF Guidance on Submissions.

Also, have a look our other BU REF Week blog posts.

REF Week: The importance of research impact

BU research, REF Subjects, Research assessment

Photo by James Toose on Unsplash

From your career to the REF and back again

With the institutional mock-REF exercise underway, and submission to REF2021 looming in the not so distant future, it’s a busy period for BU’s Impact Champions, Officers and PDRAs. Ensuring each Unit of Assessment’s most promising impact case studies are identified and developed right up until Research England’s cut-off of 31st July 2020 is the most important duty of BU’s Impact Sub-Committee.

Clearly, impact development is critical across BU for our success in the REF and subsequent quality-related (QR) income. In REF2014, the return for a 4* case study was ~£46k – a fact that can be boasted by contributing authors in their applications for career progression. Yet many academics are reluctant to spend time on impact-related activities, primarily because they feel the time that they invest would be better spent elsewhere. I’d like to contest this viewpoint for three key reasons:

  • Research impact is important to BU and is here to stay: It is heavily featured in BU2025 and the revised definition of Fusion. The Impact Sub-Committee is working to bring about the culture change that is required for impact to be embraced across the institution, and to bring about appropriate recognition for academics with impactful research.
  • A track record of societal impact can increase your chances of grant success: UK Research and Innovation (UKRI, formerly RCUK) bids require impact plans, and those who have previously engaged with society are more likely to be rewarded.
  • Engaging with society, charities and industry provides an opportunity for academics to get out of the office and have a positive influence on the real-world. For some this will have the additional bonus of financial investment and return from those they engage with – many matched-funded PhD studentships result from these relationships.

So how do you get involved in research impact? One of the hardest jobs of the UoA impact teams is to identify potential case studies – if you are already involved in impactful research, let your Impact Champion or Officer know. If you have an idea for future impact, also let them know. Impact development does not need to drain your time, particularly if you seek out the support that is on offer, and work in collaborative teams. This last point is important – developing the best impact case studies will benefit the whole institution in terms of REF return, and the responsibility shouldn’t fall on a few individuals. On the contrary, because research impact has increasing relevance to an individual’s internal and external career progression, there has been no better time to contribute to BU’s REF impact preparations.

By Professor Sarah Bate, Chair of the BU Impact Sub-Committee

Want to know more?

For more information about how impact will be assessed in REF2021, see Part 3, Section 3 of the REF Guidance on Submissions and Part 3, Section 4 and Annex A of the REF Panel Criteria and Working Methods.

Also, have a look our other BU REF Week blog posts.

REF Week: BU REF Preparation Update

BU research, REF Subjects, Research assessment

Photo by Nicolas Hoizey on Unsplash

As you will have seen from the Welcome to BU REF Week on Monday, REF 2021 is fast approaching! To prepare for the final submission in Autumn 2020, various stocktake exercises have already taken place, and many BU staff are now in the throes of a mock REF assessment exercise which will examine all three elements of the REF: Outputs, Impact and Environment.

All REF-eligible staff are being asked to submit between 1–5 outputs for review by a panel consisting of a number of academic peers from within BU and 2–3 expert reviewers from external institutions. Outputs should be selected by the academics from their list of publications on BRIAN, the University’s online publications management system. Staff will need to make sure that reviewers can access a full-text version of their chosen outputs by ensuring:

  • The output is uploaded to BURO (BU’s open access repository);
  • The publication record on BRIAN includes a DOI or URL which links to the full output;
  • A copy of the output is uploaded into BRIAN.

The deadline for academics to select their outputs on BRIAN is 28th February 2019.

Each Unit of Assessment (UOA) will also submit a number of Impact Case Studies and an Environment Narrative to the reviewers for assessment. The reviewers are aiming to return their scores in early May 2019 and a UOA Moderation Meeting will then be scheduled for the reviewers within each UOA in May/June 2019 to discuss the scores.

If you have any queries about your REF submission, you can contact your relevant UOA Leader or you can email: REF@bournemouth.ac.uk.

Want to know more?

For more information about REF 2021, have a look at the REF Guidance on Submissions and REF Panel Criteria and Working Methods.

Also, have a look at our other BU REF Week blog posts.

REF Week: Draft BU REF 2021 Code of Practice

BU research, REF Subjects, Research assessment

Photo by Pascal Muller on Unsplash

The fundamental policy change for REF 2021 is that institutions must submit all staff with significant responsibility for research, rather than selecting individuals for submission. This change was introduced in response to concerns that selecting staff in previous exercises (such as REF 2014 and RAE 2008) had potentially deleterious effects on individuals, their career choices, progression and morale.

Developing a Code of Practice

All institutions submitting to the REF 2021 must develop and apply a code of practice which sets out the approach they are taking in preparing their submissions. Codes must detail how institutions will apply fair and transparent processes to identify staff with significant responsibility for research, determine who is an independent researcher, and how outputs will be selected. Processes must be consulted on and agreed with staff representative groups. Codes must be submitted to Research England by 7 June 2019. The REF Equality and Diversity Advisory Panel will examine these and advise institutions where revisions are required.

Inclusivity

Inclusivity is extremely important at BU and been a major influence on how the draft BU REF 2021 Code of Practice has developed over the past year. The University Leadership Team (ULT) has discussed various options for identifying staff with significant responsibility for research. These discussions were informed by modelling data and equality analyses. A number of options for identifying staff with significant responsibility for research have been identified. These are based on indicators of active engagement in independent research and will form the basis of the consultation in March with BU staff and staff representative groups. In particular, feedback will be sought on the indicators identified, whether these are applicable across disciplines, and whether these can be applied in a fair, transparent and consistent way to identify all staff with significant responsibility for research.

Your feedback counts!

We plan to share the draft BU REF 2021 Code of Practice with all staff in early March 2019, welcoming feedback and suggestions for improvement. Further information will be available soon!

Want to know more?

See pages 10 and 39 of the REF Guidance on Submissions document for information about how equality and diversity considerations will be taken into account within REF 2021. There is a dedicated Equality and Diversity section on the REF 2021 website too.

Also, have a look at our other BU REF Week blog posts.

BU Systematic Review Masterclass starting tomorrow

BU research, Events, Featured academics, Publishing, Research assessment, Research news, Uncategorized, writing

Looking forward to our annual Systematic Review Masterclass at Bournemouth University which will be starting tomorrow February 14th.  This year for the first time we have renamed it a ‘Systematic Review to Inform Clinical Practice’ as it is not only a free-standing masterclass but also a level 7 unit of Continuing Professional Development and Training .  This year we aim to provide students with the opportunity to choose an area of interest and undertake an in-depth, independent study in the form of a systematic review, focusing on a negotiated aspect of clinical practice.  Prof. Vanora Hundley and I had published over twenty systematic reviews (or papers about systematic reviewing) over the past two decades. [1-21]  The unit will have input from BU’s Academic Liaison Librarian, Caspian Dugdale, and BU academics such as Dr. Bibha Simkhada, Lecturer in Nursing.

Professors Vanora Hundley and Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH)

 

References:

  1. van Teijlingen E, Wilson, B, Barry, N, Ralph, A, McNeill, G, Graham, W, Campbell, D. (eds.) (1998) Effectiveness of interventions to promote healthy eating in pregnant women & women of childbearing age: a review, London: Health Education Authority www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/documents/effect_eatpregant.pdf  [ISBN: 0752110977].
  2. van Teijlingen ER, Bruce, J. (1999) Systematic reviews of health promotion initiatives: the Smokebusters experience, Health Education, 99: 76-83.
  3. Ryan M, Scott DA, Reeves C, Bate A., van Teijlingen E, Russell E, Napper M, Robb C (2001) Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: systematic review of techniques. Health Technology Assessment 5(5)
  4. Simkhada, B., van Teijlingen E., Porter, M., Simkhada, P. (2008) Factors affecting the utilisation of antenatal care in developing countries: a systematic review of the literature, Journal of Advanced Nursing 61(3): 244-260.
  5. Paul-Ebhohimhen, V.A., Poobalan, A., van Teijlingen E. (2008) Systematic review of effectiveness of school-based sexual health interventions in Sub-Saharan Africa, BMC Public Health, 8(4). www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/8/4
  6. Robertson L, Douglas F, Ludbrook A., Reid G., van Teijlingen E. (2008) What works with men? A systematic review of health promoting interventions targeting men, BMC Health Services Research 8(141). www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/8/141
  7. Acharya, D.R., Bhattarai, R, Poobalan, A, van Teijlingen E.R., Chapman, G. (2010) Factors associated with teenage pregnancy in South Asia: a systematic review. Health Sciences Journal 4(1): 3-14. www.hsj.gr/volume4/issue1/402.pdf
  8. Hundley V, Avan B, Braunholtz D, and Graham WJ (2012). Are birth kits a good idea? A systematic review of the evidence. Midwifery 28(2): 204-215
  9. Wasti, SP, van Teijlingen E., Simkhada, P., Randall, J., Baxter S, Kirkpatrick P, Vijay Singh Gc. (2012) Factors influencing adherence to antiretroviral treatment in Asian developing countries: a systematic review, Tropical Medicine & International Health 17(1): 71-81. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-3156.2011.02888.x/pdf
  10. VA Hundley, BI Avan, CJ Sullivan, WJ Graham. (2013) Should oral misoprostol be used to prevent postpartum haemorrhage in home-birth settings in low-resource countries? A systematic review of the evidence. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 120:277–287DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.12049
  11. van Teijlingen, ER, Simkhada, B., Ireland J., Simkhada P., Bruce J. (2012) Evidence-based health care in Nepal: The importance of systematic reviews, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 1(4): 114-118.
  12. Robertson, C, Archibald, D, Avenell, A, Douglas, F., Hoddinott, P., van Teijlingen E, et al. (2014) Systematic reviews of & integrated report on quantitative, qualitative & economic evidence base for the management of obesity in men. Health Technology Assessment 18(35): 1-424. http://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/118180/FullReport-hta18350.pdf
  13. Stewart, F, Fraser, C, Robertson, C, Avenell, A, Archibald, D, Douglas, F, Hoddinott, P, van Teijlingen, E, Boyers, D. (2014) Are men difficult to find? Identifying male-specific studies in MEDLINE & Embase, Systematics Reviews 3,78
  14. Gyawali, B., Neupane, D., Sharma, R., Mishra, S.R., van Teijlingen, E., Kallestrup, P. (2015) Prevalence of type 2 diabetes in Nepal: Systematic review & meta-analysis from 2000 to 2014 Global Health Action 8: 29088 www.globalhealthaction.net/index.php/gha/article/view/29088/pdf_189
  15. Boyers, D, Stewart, F, Fraser, C, Robertson, C, Avenell, A, Archibald, D, Douglas, F, Hoddinott P, van Teijlingen E. (2015). A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of non-surgical obesity interventions in men, Obesity Research & Clinical Practice 9(4), 310-327.
  16. Robertson, C, Avenell, A, Boachie, C., Stewart, F., Archibald D., Hoddinott, P, Douglas, F, van Teijlingen E, Boyers D. (2016) Should weight loss and maintenance programmes be designed differently for men? Systematic review of long-term RCTs presenting data for men & women: The ROMEO Project, Obesity Research & Clinical Practice 10: 70-84.
  17. Simkhada, P.P., Sharma, A., van Teijlingen, ER., Beanland, R,L. (2016) Factors influencing sexual behaviour between tourists and tourism employees: A systematic review. Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 6(1): 530-538. www.nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/article/view/14735/11952
  18. Symon, A., Pringle, J., Cheyne, H., Downe, S., Hundley, V., Lee, E., Lynn, F., McFadden, A., McNeill, J., Renfrew, M., Ross-Davie, M., van Teijlingen, E., Whitford, H, Alderdice, F. (2016) Midwifery-led antenatal care models: Mapping a systematic review to an evidence-based quality framework to identify key components & characteristics of care, BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth 16: 168 http://rdcu.be/uifu  
  19. Hanley GE, Munro S, Greyson D, Gross MM, Hundley V, Spiby H and Janssen PA (2016) Diagnosing onset of labor: A systematic review of definitions in the research literature. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 16: 71 http://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12884-016-0857-4
  20. Robertson, C., Avenell, A., Stewart, F., Archibald, D., Douglas, F., Hoddinott, P., van Teijlingen, E., Boyers, D. (2017) Clinical effectiveness of weight loss & weight maintenance interventions for men: a systematic review of men-only randomised controlled trials (ROMEO Project), American Journal of Men’s Health 11(4): 1096-1123.
  21. Symon, A., Pringle, J., Downe, S., Hundley, V., Lee, E., Lynn, F., McFadden, A., McNeill, J., Renfrew, M., Ross-Davie, M., van Teijlingen, E., Whitford, H., Alderdice, F. (2017) Antenatal care trial interventions: a systematic scoping review and taxonomy development of care models BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth 17:8 http://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12884-016-1186-3
  22. Pitchforth, E, Nolte, E, Corbett, J, Miani, C, Winpenny, E, van Teijlingen E, et al. (2017) Community hospitals and their services in the NHS: identifying transferable learning from international developments – scoping review, systematic review, country reports and case studies Health Services & Delivery Research 5(19): 1-248.
  23. Ochillo, M., van Teijlingen, E., Hind, M. (2017) Influence of faith-based organisations on HIV prevention strategies in Africa: a systematic review. African Health Sciences 17(3): 753-761.
  24. Mahato, P., van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P., Angell, C. (2017) Determinants of quality of care & access to Basic Emergency Obstetric & Neonatal Care facilities & midwife-led facilities in low & middle-income countries: A Systematic Review, Journal of Asian Midwives 4(2):25-51. https://ecommons.aku.edu/jam/vol4/iss2/4/
  25. Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Sharma, A., Bissell, P., Poobalan, A., Wasti, S.P. (2018) Health consequences of sex trafficking: A systematic review, Journal of Manmohan Memorial Institute of Health Sciences, 4(1): 130-149.