Category / Research communication

IMSET Seminar: Exploring the chaîne opératoire of applied long-term human ecodynamics

Thursday 21st January 4pm – 6pm

Exploring the chaîne opératoire of applied long-term human ecodynamics: examples from the human paleocology of Subarctic and Arctic seas.

Book your place in the seminar with Professor Ben Fitzhugh, Department of Anthropology, University of Washington.

Professor Fitzhugh’s research focuses on human-environmental dynamics and archaeological histories of maritime/coastal hunter-gatherers especially in the North Pacific. His research addresses questions of human vulnerability and resilience in remote subarctic environments.

Researchers studying long-term human ecological histories increasingly promote the relevance of this work to contemporary environmental managers, policy makers, and heritage communities. After all, our case studies and comparative insights capture greater ranges of socio-environmental variation and longer temporal sequences than are available to planners tethered to the short observation scales. These longer time-lines and more varied “completed experiments of the past” make it possible to track dynamic relationships and downstream legacies driving more and less sustainable strategies and relationships. This information should help us to avoid the mistakes of the past and to build policy on robust understandings about the capacities of systems for stability and change. Nevertheless, meaningful engagement remains limited. If we are serious about this effort, we owe it to ourselves to examine the practical challenges and paths to solutions to implementation of applied long-term human ecodynamics. For this talk, Professor Fitzhugh will expand on the need for a “chaîne opératoire of applied long-term human ecodynamics.” Chaîne opératoires are the inferred technical steps perceived to govern the production, use and discard of technological objects like stone tools, and his argument here is that we could stand to investigate the impediments and limitations of practice that keep academic work at arms length from management policy. Using climate, marine ecological and archaeological case studies from the subarctic North Pacific, he will explore key steps involved in forming and bringing compelling human ecodynamic scenarios of the past into dialogue with contemporary management science and policy. These steps involve managing data uncertainties, unequal resolutions and relevance, disparate interpretive constructs, and epistemic and ontological asymmetries.

Professor Fitzhugh is currently Director of the Quaternary Research Center at the University of Washington, and in this role, seeks to promote interdisciplinary scholarship in the evolution of the earth surface (and the role of humans in it) over the past two and a half millions years.

https://anthropology.washington.edu/people/ben-fitzhugh

Professor Fitzhugh will speak for approximately 1 hour, followed by Q&A.

Book a place at this seminar via eventbrite.

Conversation article: Five ways to manage your screen time in a lockdown, according to tech experts

shutterstock

John McAlaney, Bournemouth University; Deniz Cemiloglu, Bournemouth University, and Raian Ali, Hamad Bin Khalifa University

The average daily time spent online by adults increased by nearly an hour during the UK’s spring lockdown when compared to the previous year, according to communications regulator Ofcom. With numerous countries back under severe pandemic restrictions, many of us once again find ourselves questioning whether our heavy reliance on technology is impacting our wellbeing.

It’s true that digital devices have provided new means of work, education, connection, and entertainment during lockdown. But the perceived pressure to be online, the tendency to procrastinate to avoid undertaking tasks, and the use of digital platforms as a way to escape distress all have the potential to turn healthy behaviours into habits. This repetitive use can develop into addictive patterns, which can in turn affect a user’s wellbeing.

In our recent research, we explored how to empower people to have healthier and more productive relationships with digital technology. Our findings can be applied to those suffering from digital addiction as well as those who may feel their digital diet has ballooned unhealthily in the solitude and eventlessness of lockdown.

Screen time and addiction

Digital addiction refers to the compulsive and excessive use of digital devices. The design of digital platforms themselves contributes to this addictive use. Notifications, news feeds, likes and comments have all been shown to contribute towards a battle for your attention, which leads users to increase the time they spend looking at screens.

Screen time is an obvious measure of digital addiction, although researchers have noted that there is no simple way to determine how much screen time one can experience before it becomes problematic. As such, there is a continued lack of consensus on how we should think about and measure digital addiction.

Woman video conferences with others on a screen
Many of us have turned to video conferencing to keep in touch with friends and family.
shutterstock

During a global pandemic, when there often feels like no alternative to firing up Netflix, or video conferencing with friends and family, screen time as an indicator of digital addiction is clearly ineffective. Nonetheless, research conducted on digital addiction intervention and prevention does provide insights on how we can all engage with our digital technologies in a healthier way during a lockdown.

1. Setting limits

During the course of our research, we found that effective limit setting can motivate users to better control their digital usage. When setting limits, whatever goal you’re deciding to work towards should be aligned with the five “SMART” criteria. That means the goal needs to be specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-bound.

For example, instead of framing your goal as “I will cut down my digital media use”, framing it as “I will spend no more than one hour watching Netflix on weekdays” will enable you to plan effectively and measure your success objectively.

2. Online Support Groups

It might seem a little paradoxical, but you can actually use technology to help promote greater control over your screen time and digital overuse. One study has found that online peer support groups — where people can discuss their experiences with harmful technology use and share information on how to overcome these problems — can help people adjust their digital diet in favour of their personal wellbeing. Even an open chat with your friends can help you understand when your tech use is harmful.

3. Self-reflection

Meanwhile, increasing your sense of self-awareness about addictive usage patterns can also help you manage your digital usage. You can do this by identifying applications we use repetitively and recognising the triggers that prompt this excessive consumption.

Self-awareness can also be attained by reflecting on emotional and cognitive processing. This involves recognising feelings and psychological needs behind excessive digital usage. “If I don’t instantly reply to a group conversation, I will lose my popularity” is a problematic thought that leads to increased screen time. Reflecting on the veracity of such thoughts can help release people from addictive patterns of digital usage.

4. Know your triggers

Acquiring self-awareness on addictive usage patterns can actually help us to identify unsatisfied needs that trigger digital overuse. When we do this, we can pave the way to define alternative behaviours and interests to satisfy those needs in different ways.

Mindfulness meditation, for instance, could be an alternative way of relieving stress, fears, or anxiety that currently leads users to digital overuse. If you feel your digital overuse might simply be due to boredom, then physical activity, cooking, or adopting offline hobbies can all provide alternative forms of entertainment. Again, technology can actually help enable this, for example by letting you create online groups for simultaneous exercising, producing a hybrid solution to unhealthy digital habits.

Father and daughter have fun cooking in kitchen
Cooking is one alternative to unhealthy digital habits.
shutterstock

5. Prioritise the social

We must also remember that our relationship with digital media reflects our inner drives. Humans are innately social creatures, and socialising with others is important to our mental wellbeing. Social media can enhance our opportunities for social contact, and support several positive aspects of mental wellbeing, such as peer support and the enhancement of self-esteem. The engagement with media to purposefully socialise during a lockdown can support our mental health, rather than being detrimental to our wellbeing.

Ultimately, technology companies also have a responsibility to both understand and be transparent about how the design of their platforms may cause harm. These companies should empower users with explanations and tools to help them make informed decisions about their digital media use.

While we may consider this as a legitimate user requirement, technology companies seem to be at the very early stages of delivering it. In the meantime, reflecting on when and why we turn to our screens is a good basis upon which to form positive digital habits during new lockdowns imposed this year.

John McAlaney, Associate Professor in Psychology, Bournemouth University; Deniz Cemiloglu, Researcher, Bournemouth University, and Raian Ali, Professor, College of Science and Engineering, Hamad Bin Khalifa University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Department of Health and Social Care statement on prioritisation of research studies

Please find below a statement from the Department of Health & Social Care. Please bear this in mind when in correspondence with NHS Trusts and if planning a clinical research study.
If you have any queries, please contact Suzy Wignall, Clinical Governance Advisor, in the first instance.


Statement from DHSC 

We recognise that at the current time those working in many NHS sites are under huge pressure as the number of COVID-19 cases and admissions to hospitals continue to rise and frontline clinical staff are unable to work due to sickness.

While we have a small number of proven treatments and vaccines for COVID-19, more are needed to reduce transmission, reduce the number of patients that require hospitalisation and to improve outcomes for those that do. It is therefore critical that at this challenging time we continue to recruit participants to our urgent public health (UPH) studies. As such I am writing to confirm that the current levels of prioritisation for research studies, set out within the Restart Framework still apply, as follows:

  • Level 1a (Top Priority) – COVID-19 UPH vaccine and prophylactic studies (as prioritised by the Vaccines Task Force and agreed by Jonathan Van-Tam, deputy CMO) and platform therapeutics trials (currently RECOVERY/RECOVERY +; PRINCIPLE; REMAP CAP).
  • Level 1b – Other COVID-19 UPH studies
  • Level 2 – Studies where the research protocol includes an urgent treatment or intervention without which patients could come to harm. These might be studies that provide access to potentially life preserving or life-extending treatment not otherwise available to the patient.
  • Level 3 – All other studies (including COVID-19 studies not in Level 1a or 1b).

I would also like to take this opportunity to remind you of the NIHR guidance for a second wave of covid 19 activity (https://www.nihr.ac.uk/documents/nihr-guidance-for-a-second-wave-of-covid-19-activity/25837).This guidance still applies and, as outlined, states that the deployment of staff funded through an NIHR Infrastructure award or funded by the NIHR Clinical Research Network (CRN) to front line duties should only occur in exceptional circumstances.

The deployment of clinical academic staff should be undertaken within the guidelines issued by a working group convened by the UK Clinical Academic Training Forum and the Conference of Postgraduate Medical  Deans of the UK. Where NHS Trusts consider they need to redeploy staff to support the frontline this should only be done to support clinical activity during the emergency phase of the pandemic and we would expect them to return to their R&D roles as soon as possible, once the pressures on the system reduce.

As indicated by the Restart Framework, at the current time, we need to continue prioritise our support for the most urgent COVID-19 research as part of the response to tackle the pandemic. At the same time we need to ensure we continue to try and maintain support to deliver non-COVID studies currently open on the portfolio, particularly those within Level 2. A system-wide Recovery, Resilience and Growth programme has been established which brings together the key partners across the clinical research ecosystem to ensure the UK is well-positioned to take a coordinated national approach to achieving the recovery of the UK’s clinical research delivery and restore a full, diverse and active research portfolio as soon as practicable.

COVID-19 in Qatar

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

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH)

 

Reference:

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

Conversation article: Brexit and Covid: can British citizens travel in Europe after January 1?

British tourists hoping to travel to Europe in the new year will need to cancel or postpone their trips until the restrictions are lifted.
Andy Rain/EPA

Dimitrios Buhalis, Bournemouth University

The combined forces of COVID-19 and Brexit have created massive uncertainty over where British people can and cannot travel.

A number of countries rapidly imposed travel bans on the UK in an attempt to control the spread of a new variant that was identified as spreading across the country. Most European countries halted land and air transportation links with the UK or reinforced quarantine periods, as did Canada, India, Russia, Colombia, Kuwait and Turkey. Government advice and rules have been changing regularly.

But more confusion awaits after December 31 at 11pm. The UK left the EU on January 31 2020 and the transition period after Brexit comes to an end on this date. From January 1, British citizens will lose their automatic right to free movement in the European Union as a result of the nation’s decision to vote to leave the bloc.

Rules announced on December 9 stressed that under COVID-19 restrictions, Britons could be barred from EU entry on January 1 2021, when Britain becomes a “third country” to the European Union unless their travel is deemed essential.

From January 1 2021, the relationship between the UK and the EU may be determined by the trade agreement that is currently being negotiated. It may be that travel arrangements are agreed in that deal but, so far, talks are stalling on other issues.

As Britain becomes a “third country” (any country not in the EU) from January 1 2021, British residents cannot assume the right to visit EU countries while COVID restrictions are in place. When the UK was an EU member state, travel within the EU was regulated by the fundamental principle of freedom of movement. Now that the UK is no longer a member state, it can therefore no longer expect automatic travel rights.

On October 22, the EU Council instructed member states to gradually lift travel restrictions for residents of only eight “third countries” with low coronavirus infection rates. These included Australia, New Zealand and Singapore. All others, including British residents from January 1 (as the UK becomes a third country), will not be allowed to travel to the EU until the COVID-19 situation allows this travel restriction to be lifted. All the countries granted an exception had significantly less severe COVID situations than many other parts of the world so we can see there is some way to go before the UK meets such a hurdle, even beyond the current bans that have been brought in because of the new virus strain.

Holiday planning

These rules mean that British tourists hoping to travel to Europe in the new year, including those who may have flights booked already, will need to cancel or postpone their trip until the restrictions are lifted or Britain is added to the list of safe “third” countries.

Understandably, the pandemic, new strains of the virus, restrictions around the world and the expected third wave following the Christmas holiday prevent short term optimism.




Read more:
What are Australian-style and Canadian-style Brexit trade deals?


Until COVID-19 is contained and more people are vaccinated, both domestically and internationally, it is unlikely that much non-essential travel will be allowed. Realistically, this should be in late spring or early summer time.

If British tourists are prevented from travelling due to government restrictions, they should be refunded by suppliers, or, if they wish, they can accept value vouchers for future use.

Hat, sunglasses, mobile phone, shell, two passports with boarding passes and a plane figurine with a no symbol over it
British residents are barred from visiting EU countries under the current COVID restrictions.
ADragan/Shutterstock

After Easter, we should see restrictions lifted and more international travel activity. Global tourism has been haemorrhaging as a result of COVID-19-induced restrictions and the consequent economic recession.

Most governments will be observing the COVID situation very carefully and evaluate when it will be safe to reduce restrictions and remove travel bans. It is in the best interest of all stakeholders that this happens as soon as it is safe to do so.

It is worth noting, too, that many European countries are very keen to welcome back British travellers when it is safe to do so. Several kept their borders open, even when the epidemiological situation in the UK was much worse than in many tourism destinations.

The Brexit impact on travel

After COVID restrictions are lifted, most British travellers will find that Brexit brings some minor inconveniences. They will have to use “all passports” or “visa not required” lanes at borders and will travel similarly to non-EU citizens.

When the European Travel Authorisation and Information System (ETIAS) is introduced in the second half of 2022, visa-exempt, non-EU citizens will need to apply for travel authorisation online before their trip and pay a fee of 7 euros.

Other than that, they will be restricted to staying less than 90 days in a 180 period in the Schengen region.

Brexit sign at bus stop on UK high street reads:
British travellers are wishing for a worry-free 2021 – but will they get one?
Yau Ming Low/Shutterstock

One thing we’ve learned during the COVID era is how much we miss travelling. In the short term, if the virus is contained and restrictions relaxed, short and mid haul trips, often arranged at the last minute, will be the best option. Gradually, we will be able to travel again, create memorable experiences and reconnect with loved ones in wonderful places around the world.

Dimitrios Buhalis, Professor, Bournemouth University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Midwifery and the Media

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

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

 

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

 

References:

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

Conversation article – Tackling in children’s rugby must be banned to curb dementia risks

Rugby World Cup winners have joined a chorus of voices calling to reduce tackling in the sport in a bid to stop the growing number of brain injuries afflicting many of its former players.

When the likes of 42-year-old Rugby World Cup winner, Steve Thompson, announced that he could not remember the tournament because his brain was left too damaged from his career, he highlighted that rugby, in its current state, is not fit for contemporary society.

Invented in the 1800s, when safety was far less of a concern, rugby has been resistant to change. But this week, Thompson and 80 other high profile former rugby players announced that they are living with dementia, with many experiencing as early as their 40s.

Another former England player, Michael Lipman, said:

If I knew then what I know now, in terms of how I’m feeling, and what my wife and family go through on a daily basis, I definitely would have been a hell of a lot more careful.

Players are suing several governing bodies, including World Rugby and the Rugby Football Union. The law suit, which is in its infancy, will no doubt grow in claimants.

World Rugby responded to the lawsuit with a statement, saying it “takes takes player safety very seriously and implements injury-prevention strategies based on the latest available knowledge, research and evidence”.

Professional rugby will have its reckoning in the courts. But if the impact of tackling on the brain is strong enough that devoted rugby heroes are suing their former employer, policies need to be drastically revised and soon, particularly for children. The first thing the sport must do is protect young players by banning tackling for under 18s and transitioning to touch rugby.

In denial

Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy is not new. It was first described in the 1920s in boxers (it was called “punch drunk syndrome” at the time). But now research is proving what scientists, players and their families have long claimed – that repeated collisions are causing permanent damage to the brain.

When England’s 1966 World Cup-winning football heroes began to be diagnosed with dementia, the football world took notice. Now it is England’s World Cup rugby heroes that are suffering – and suffering younger. The FA banned heading the ball in training for children up to the age of 12, and severely restricted it after. It’s time for the rugby unions to react in the same way.




Read more:
NFL concussion lawsuit payouts reveal how racial bias in science continues


But whereas football can remove heading from the game, rugby is predicated on collision. As noted by one journalist, the only way to make rugby safe in its current format is to stop playing it. And earlier this year, researchers linked with England’s Rugby Football Union found that their sport offers more head trauma than other sports.

The case of rugby is more reminiscent of what happened to the National Football League in the US after the discovery that players were at increased risk of long-term neurological conditions, particularly CTE. Scores of players sued the NFL and received a US$1bn pay out.

The NFL has, for now, survived. World Rugby has insurance, so it might too. Yet surviving this lawsuit is only one threat to the sport. The fear over children playing the game will no doubt be rugby’s biggest threat.

No more half measures

Sporting bodies can no longer take half measures and policy must evolve to protect the huge numbers of children playing rugby. Children receive legal protection from other known harms, the list for which is very long (smoking and alcohol use, for example).




Read more:
Concussion can accelerate ageing of the brain – research from the rugby pitch


Both football and rugby are regularly played by children, and particularly in school PE. But whereas children under 12 are not permitted to head the ball in practice, they can tackle another player in rugby training. And where children over 12 are permitted to only head the ball five times a month in football, they can be tackled by a player twice their size as often as the PE teacher decides.

Experts are now calling for tackling to be removed from the sport for children – and curtailed in practice for adults. This means that children should play touch rugby until they are 18. They can then make an informed decision to transition to tackle rugby or continue with touch when they are old enough.

Research shows that touch rugby is rising in popularity and has better health outcomes for children. But calls for bans on tackling in compulsory school rugby have gone unheeded for many years.

History shows that industries respond to health crises when they are forced to do so – either through legal cases or government legislation. A key example is how the tobacco companies were forced to stop denying the harmful effects of smoking in the 1990s. Rugby is no different. Public pressure and court cases may drive change at some level but legislation is needed to protect players, particularly children.

In the US, the Concussion Legacy Foundation has launched the “tackling can wait” campaign for American Football. It’s time for the UK to follow and protect its children from brain injury by banning tackling in youth rugby. It will be for the courts and the players’ unions to determine how much tackling adults can do – but if they have any sense, they will heed the warnings of those World Cup heroes.

Eric Anderson, Professor of Masculinities, Sexualities and Sport, University of Winchester; Adam John White, Lecturer, Oxford Brookes University, and Keith Parry, Deputy Head Of Department in Department of Sport & Events Management, Bournemouth University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

PGR Virtual Poster Exhibition | Kevin Davidson

Poster Exhibition | The 12th Annual Postgraduate Research Conference 

Kevin Davidson, MRes student in the Faculty of Science & Technology with this poster entitled:

Mindful Resilience: supporting young people at risk of gaming and gambling-related harms.

Click the poster below to enlarge.

There is increasing evidence of gambling-type behaviour in young gamers and associated harms to their health and wellbeing. This issue is being addressed by a project to develop the educational resources for healthcare practitioners in this field, with Bournemouth University partnering with the Young Gamers and Gamblers Education Trust (YGAM), Betknowmore, the Responsible Gambling Council, and Playtech. Within this project an MRes has been funded to draw upon literature on Mindfulness and Resilience in outlining a working concept of Mindful Resilience. This concept of Mindful Resilience will be applied to digital contexts, such as those where young gamers engage in gambling-type behaviour, to foster digital resilience. This poster will describe and outline a working concept of Mindful Resilience and demonstrate how it applies in the digital context.

 

You can view the full poster exhibition on the conference webpage.

 


If this research has inspired you and you’d like to explore applying for a research degree please visit the postgraduate research web pages or contact our dedicated admissions team.

 

 

PGR Virtual Poster Exhibition | Raksha Thapa

Poster Exhibition | The 12th Annual Postgraduate Research Conference 

Raksha Thapa, PhD student in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences with this poster entitled:

Caste exclusion and health discrimination in South Asia: A systematic review

 

Click the poster below to enlarge.

The caste system is a three millennia old social stratification system in the world.  This review investigates caste- based inequity in health care utilisation in South Asia, particularly focusing those at the bottom of the caste hierarchy, the so-called Dalit communities.  A systematic methodology was followed, key databases (including CINAHL, Medline, SocINDEX, PubMed, Nepjol, JSTOR and  ASSIA ) were searched using the PRISMA. Out of 15,109 papers nine selected papers were included in the review. The papers focused on studies in India (n=7) and Nepal (n=2) and using methods including qualitative (n=2), quantitative (n=3) and mixed method (n=4) approaches. The review identified four main themes; stigma, poverty, beliefs/cultures and healthcare. Caste-based inequality impacts upon all aspects of individual’s well-being, violence and people’s opportunities to access education, employment and healthcare. Dalits appear to experience this significantly due to their lower caste and socioeconomic position which also increases their vulnerability to health.

 

You can view the full poster exhibition on the conference webpage.

 


If this research has inspired you and you’d like to explore applying for a research degree please visit the postgraduate research web pages or contact our dedicated admissions team.

 

 

PGR Virtual Poster Exhibition | Bronwyn Sherriff

Poster Exhibition | The 12th Annual Postgraduate Research Conference 

Bronwyn Sherriff, PhD student in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences with this poster entitled:

Coping with Covid-19: reflecting on the process of modifying methods midway.

 

Click the poster below to enlarge.

Background: Few PhD students wish to be faced with the task of adapting their research methods, especially midway, when timelines and project plans have been painstakingly prepared, revised, and scrutinised. Following the realisation that Covid-19 was unlikely to be a passing pandemic, this poster summarises the process taken to address the crucial question: Are the proposed methods still feasible considering the change in context? Approach: Although problem-solving and flexibility are important characteristics of any researcher, in the postCovid-19 research milieu, the role of collaboration and stakeholder engagement are likely to become increasingly pivotal. Both represent invaluable tools for (re-)planning and (re-)designing healthcare research by informing essential research decisions. Contribution: The impact of Covid-19 remains an ongoing challenge to student researchers. This poster provides a pragmatic guide, particularly for healthcare research students, by explaining the approach used to modify the initial research design and presenting key considerations which may be useful.

 

You can view the full poster exhibition on the conference webpage.

 


If this research has inspired you and you’d like to explore applying for a research degree please visit the postgraduate research web pages or contact our dedicated admissions team.

 

 

Policy Influence Opportunity – Forestry, land management & environmental

Call for potential oral witnesses for EFRA Committee tree planting inquiry

  • The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee secretariat is looking for potential oral witnesses for the Committee’s inquiry into Tree Planting and Woodlands. please see the background to the inquiry and Call for Evidence for further information.
  • The Committee would be particularly interested to hear from researchers with expertise in forestry relating to some of the following issues: woodland management, land management, agroforestry, climate change mitigation and adaptation, biosecurity, biodiversity, economics and/or policy analysis of UK Government and Devolved Administrations’ policies and funding on forestry and tree planting.
  • Researchers who are interested must nominate themselves by 15 December. Please inform your BU Impact Officer and the BU policy team (policy@bournemouth.ac.uk) if you nominate yourself.
  • The Committee is committed to improving the diversity of the witnesses it hears evidence from because this provides a broader evidence base for its inquiries, so would also particularly want to hear from women researchers and researchers from minority ethnic communities.
  • The secretariat currently expects the evidence session to take place in early February.
  • Please complete your nominations on this form.

PGR Virtual Poster Exhibition | Mashael Alsufyani

Poster Exhibition | The 12th Annual Postgraduate Research Conference 

Mashael Alsufyani, PhD student in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences with this poster entitled:

Exploring the Usage of Social Media by Female Saudi Nursing Students for Personal and Academic Purposes.

 

Click the poster below to enlarge.

The simulation model used while undertaking the Structural Health Management (SHM) task to predict the response of the system/structure(s) to disturbances, got phase-out when the real system/structure material properties changes in non-uniform and complex way. In order to accurately predict future states of a system/ structure, which can change its behaviour to a large degree in response to environmental influences, the existence of precise models of the system and its surroundings is demandable. For this, simulation modelling within DT paradigm concept is proposed, with DT encompassing continuous and automatic model updating framework, reducing the computational (parametric) uncertainties that arises with time in the process and ultimately having a lifetime reliable prognosis tool for the structural behaviour. The solver (algorithm/framework) will be tested with a real-world problem by setting a DT environment integrated with an ultra-high-fidelity simulation model (for eg: cathodic protection (CP) model built for the prediction of the corrosion status of a seastructure).

 

You can view the full poster exhibition on the conference webpage.

 


If this research has inspired you and you’d like to explore applying for a research degree please visit the postgraduate research web pages or contact our dedicated admissions team.

 

 

PGR Virtual Poster Exhibition | Vanessa Bartholomew

Poster Exhibition | The 12th Annual Postgraduate Research Conference 

Vanessa Bartholomew, PhD student in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences with this poster entitled:

RETHINK – Can we reduce hospital admission in latent labour?

 

Click the poster below to enlarge.

Background: Women experiencing an uncomplicated pregnancy are at increased risk of obstetric intervention if admitted to hospital during latent labour. Pain and fear are significant factors in early hospital admissions. Pain catastrophising (PC) is a strong predictor of childbirth pain. Studies have yet to consider whether PC influences the timing of hospital admission. Aim: To examine whether PC is a predictor for early hospital admission when in labour and subsequently birth outcomes. Design: A pragmatic, quasi-experimental study. Sample: Primigravid women who are experiencing an uncomplicated pregnancy, will be recruited between 25-33 weeks gestation. Target sample size is 384. Data Collection: Participants will complete two online questionnaires; one antenatal, the second three weeks postnatal. Birth outcomes will also be collected. Analysis: Logistic regression, will be used to assess if PC is a predictor of early hospital admission. Other explanatory factors (e.g. socioeconomic variables) will be considered. Significance level will be p≤0.05.

 

You can view the full poster exhibition on the conference webpage.

 


If this research has inspired you and you’d like to explore applying for a research degree please visit the postgraduate research web pages or contact our dedicated admissions team.

 

 

PGR Virtual Poster Exhibition | Sara Stride

Poster Exhibition | The 12th Annual Postgraduate Research Conference 

Sara Stride, PhD student in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences with this poster entitled:

Taking time to explore appropriate methods.

 

Click the poster below to enlarge.

The first phases of my doctorate work used mixed methods to increase my understanding of midwives’ beliefs and attitudes regarding birth trauma. I identified five key themes; one of these was that midwives felt “ashamed” when women sustain severe birth trauma. Methods: Taking time to read and attend workshops this year has clarified the methods that I intend to use to now explore individual midwives’ experiences in more depth. Interviews will be facilitated using an online platform, as face to face contact needs to be minimised during the current Covid-19 Pandemic. Grounded theory will be used, so sampling, collection of data, analysis and theory construction will occur concurrently. Initial Findings: The study will provide data on midwives’ experiences whenwomen sustain severe birth trauma. Contribution to knowledge: Understanding midwives’ experiences will enable me to identify the support midwives need.

You can also listen to an audio recording exploring the poster on zoom (Passcode:66cU#RNB).

 

You can view the full poster exhibition on the conference webpage.

 


If this research has inspired you and you’d like to explore applying for a research degree please visit the postgraduate research web pages or contact our dedicated admissions team.