Category / Research communication

PGR Poster Showcase

Over the next few months we were due to showcase postgraduate research posters from The 11th Annual Postgraduate Research Conference in the Lees Gallery on Talbot Campus however, due to the lockdown we can no longer highlight the incredible research our students are undertaking in this way.

So, like many other activities across the University, we are taking it virtual. Look out over the coming weeks for a showcase of posters from PGRs across all four Faculties.

I will be sharing on Twitter (@NatStewartBU), Facebook (@BUDoctoralCollege) & on here.

BU midwifery paper cited in WHO report

Last week the Regional Office for South East Asia of the WHO (World Health Organization) published its strategy for strengthening midwifery [1].  The report highlights how Bangladesh, India and Nepal have recently introduced midwifery education. They joined DPR Korea, Myanmar, Sri Lanka and TimorLeste in establishing midwives as an independent cadre of the health workforce.

This report cited our 2015 paper on midwifery developments in Nepal which appeared in the Journal of Asian Midwives [2].  The lead author Jillian Ireland is a Visiting Faculty in the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH) and Professional Midwifery Advocate at Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, my other co-author, Joy Kemp, is Global Professional Adviser at the Royal College of Midwives (RCM).  The paper reflects on the RCM Global Midwifery Twinning Project in Nepal.  The paper argues that the presence of a strong professional association of midwives in a country yields double benefits. On one side, the association provides inputs into framing policies and developing standards of care, and on the other, it ensures quality services by continuously updating its members with information and evidence for practice.

Bournemouth University’s work in Nepal is ongoing with a project run by CMMPH helping to develop midwifery education and training the trainers funded by the German aid organisation GIZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit).

 

References:

  1. World Health Organization. Regional Office for South-East Asia (2020) Regional Strategic Directions for strengthening Midwifery in the South-East Asia Region 2020–2024, Delhi: World Health Organization. Regional Office for South-East Asia.
  2. Ireland, J., van Teijlingen, E, Kemp J. (2015) Twinning in Nepal: the Royal College of Midwives UK and the Midwifery Society of Nepal working in partnership, Journal of Asian Midwives 2 (1): 26-33. http://ecommons.aku.edu/jam/vol2/iss1/5/

 

COVID-19 and the rise of Virtual Conferences

Yesterday we had a conference paper accepted by the EUPHA (European Public Health Association) International Conference.  When the paper was originally submitted to the EUPHA Health Workforce Research Section Mid-term Conference we had opted for an oral presentation in person at the conference in Romania this summer.  However, with the COVID-19 pandemic travelling to Romania to attend this conference is not an option for many (if not most) academics.  Therefore the organising committee took the initiative to re-arrange it as a virtual meeting.   Further good news for us is that participation will be free.

Of course, I am aware that some of the strengths of attending conferences include having unexpected discussions (often in the bar) with fellow academics and being away from the day job.  At the moment being forced to choose between postponing or cancelling a conference or changing to a virtual meeting conference organisers may want to reflect on  “… ask how conferences make a difference.”  This question was  originally raised in the book Academic Conferences as Neoliberal Commodities by Donald Nicholson [1].

We should have moved to more virtual meetings and  online conferences much sooner, but it is easy to say with hindsight!  The COVID-19 crisis has thought us that virtual classrooms, internet-based tutorials, Zoom meetings and online conferences can work, albeit with their limitations.  It is worth considering the return of investment of a conference [2] not just for the conference organisers (and funders) but also  individual academics as less travel will be saving time  and society as reducing  travel, especially international flights, will improve our carbon foot print.

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH)

 

References

  1. Nicolson. D.J. (2017) Academic Conferences as Neoliberal CommoditiesPalgrave Macmillan.
  2. Nicolson. D.J. (2018) Guest post by Donald Nicolson: The problem of thinking about conferences and Return on Investment (ROI) 

 

COVID-19 Outbreak Expert Database – update

According to Parliament’s Knowledge Exchange Unit (KEU), more than 3,500 researchers from across the UK have signed up to its  COVID-19 Outbreak Expert Database, which includes a number of BU academics across all faculties.  

The KEU reports that it is already making use of the database and, later this week, will be directly contacting experts to ask them to share their insights into the COVID-19 pandemic and its short, medium and long-term impacts. Where possible, the KEU aims to acknowledge researchers’ contributions publicly.

If you haven’t already signed up, it’s not too late, as it is a live database. Follow the link and please email your faculty impact officer to let them know, so we can track BU involvement.

Signing up does not commit you to contributing in any way, it’s simply so that Parliament has your details to hand and can contact you very rapidly; if they contact you and you aren’t able to respond, they will fully understand.

The topic areas where Parliament may need to be able to access research expertise are listed below, and found on the sign up page. If you identify an area that has not been listed, please do feel free to give details on the sign-up form in ‘other’:

Agriculture and farming, Airlines/airports, Arts, Behavioural science, Burial and cremation, Brexit, Business, Charities, Children and families, Civil contingency planning and management, Climate change, Communicating uncertainty, , Consumer protection, Coronavirus, Coroners, Countryside, Courts, Criminal justice, Criminal law, Crisis communications, Critical national infrastructure, Data protection, Death, Defence, Economics, Education – higher and further, Education – schools, Elections, Emergency planning, Emergency services, Employment, Employment law, Energy, Environment, European Union, Financial services, Financial systems and institutions, Foreign policy, Government, Health economics, Health services, Housing, Human rights, Immigration, Immunology / vaccinology, Industry, Infection control, Inflation, Insolvency, International law, IT, Law, Legal aid, Leisure and tourism, Local government, Medicine, National security, Package holidays, Pandemics, Pensions, Police powers, Ports and maritime, Prisons, Public expenditure, Public finance, Public health, Public order, Railways, Registration of deaths, Religion, Social security and tax credits, Social services, Sports, Surveillance , Taxation, Trade, Transport, Unemployment, Virology, Waste, Water, Welfare, Welfare benefits.

Nepal publication: Smoking & suicide ideation

Published earlier this week in the Nepal Journal of Epidemiology a BU co-authored paper on ‘Cigarette smoking dose-response and suicidal ideation among young people in Nepal: a cross-sectional study’ [1].   The authors conducted a cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey with 452 young people in Nepal’s second largest city Pokhara.  The study matched participants by age and smoking status. The mean age was 21.6 years and 58.8% were males. The overall rate of suicidal ideation in our cohort was 8.9%. Smokers were slightly more likely to report suicidal ideation than non-smokers (aOR 1.12). The risk of developing suicidal ideation was 3.56 (95% CI 1.26-10.09) times more in individuals who smoked greater than 3.5 cigarettes per week (p=0.01).
The paper concludes that the rate of suicidal ideation was slightly higher among smokers and a dose-response relationship  existed linked with the number of cigarettes smoked per week. Being aware of the link between smoking and
suicidal ideation may help health care professionals working with young people to address more effectively the issues of mental well-being and thoughts about suicide.  The Nepal Journal of Epidemiology is an Open Access journal hence this public health  paper is freely available to readers across the globe.

Reference:

  1. Sathian, B., Menezes, R.G., Asim, M., Mekkodathil, A., Sreedharan, J., Banerjee, I., van Teijlingen, E.R., Roy, B., Subramanya, S.H., .Kharoshah, M.A., Rajesh, E., Shetty, U., Arun, M., Ram, P., Srivastava, V.K. (2020) Cigarette smoking dose-response and suicidal ideation among young people in Nepal: a cross-sectional study, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 10 (1): 821-829 https://www.nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/article/view/28277

Research in the NHS during the COVID-19 pandemic – HRA update

You may have seen an earlier blog post with regard to a halt on the review and approval of undergraduate and master’s clinical research projects. The HRA have released another update with regard to all other research and the state of play due to COVID-19.

To recognise the significant pressures on the NHS at this time, the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) announced that all new and existing studies supported through its Clinical Research Network would be paused to focus instead on COVID-19 research. You can read the full statement on the NIHR website.

The full HRA statement can be viewed here. If you have any queries mai in Research Development & Support.

Research Development & Support are also updating the following help page regularly for academics and researchers.

COVID-19: health and social care research projects for educational purposes

COVID-19 guidance for clinical researchers

The Health Research Authority have released guidance for clinical researchers, sponsors and sites with regard to COVID-19 (Coronavirus) – please read this guidance if you are currently conducting your project or are in the planning stages/set-up of the study (so you are aware of the current situation).

This guidance is subject to change and will be updated as and when required by the HRA.

You can read the guidance in the link provided above, but for convenience, these are the most likely situations BU clinical researchers may face. Please ensure that in planning amendments that these do not create additional burden to NHS staff or resources.

Amendments to existing studies impacted by wider COVID-19 response 

  • Example – Where changes to administrative arrangements are required to reduce burden or physical contact with sites – for example, changes to monitoring arrangements.

How this should be handled – these are non-substantial amendments that do not require HRA/HCRW approval or NHS R&D agreement. Where the study involves the NHS, they will be marked by the sponsor as a category C amendment not requiring assessment, and sent directly to the sites. The site should implement the amendment on the date specified by the sponsor.

  • Example – Where changes are made to how or when patients are seen to avoid exposing patients or to reduce burden on clinical services – for example, changing site visits to phone calls or postal questionnaires.

How this should be handled – these are non-substantial amendments that do not require HRA/HCRW approval or NHS R&D agreement. The same procedure as the first example should be followed.

  • Example – Where a temporary halt needs to be placed on some or all of the study, or the duration of the study needs to be extended.

How this should be handled – these are non-substantial amendments that do not require HRA/HCRW approval or NHS R&D agreement. The same procedure as above should be followed.

  • Example – studies that need to be closed.

How this should be handled – for studies not involving provision of treatment to participants, a notification to the REC or study-wide review (for non-REC studies) should be provided, and an end of study report should subsequently be provided.
For any studies involving provision of treatment to participants, careful consideration should be given to post-study care. If this cannot be in line with the information provided in the participant-information sheet, a substantial amendment should be submitted.

To support sites in implementing the amendments it is important that:

  • The changes and local implications are made clear
  • Any changes to documentation are provided in tracked changes
  • In England and Wales All correspondence to sites should be copied to R&D/I department and the PI and delivery teams
  • Where indicated above, the sponsor should include the category and confirm that no assessment is required.

There may be some instances in which the site may raise issues or changes that need to be made. If they do, please inform the Sponsor as soon as possible.

What to do next

If you think that you may need to implement any changes or amendments to your study due to COVID-19 please get in touch with us as soon as possible. If you have any concerns or queries then please also get in touch to discuss these.

Research & Knowledge Exchange Development Framework – survey closes in 5 days!

The Research & Knowledge Exchange Framework (RKEDF) is now into its fourth year.  It offers training and development opportunities to academics at all stages of their career, supporting staff to increase their skills, knowledge and capabilities.

The RKEDF offers a range of support including sessions for those who are new to research or to BU, for staff who want to further develop their research careers and for people who want to disseminate their research findings or create an impact plan.

The Research Development & Support team are currently planning activities and sessions for the 2020/21 programme of events and would like to hear your ideas and suggestions.  What’s worked well?  What would you changed?  Are there any other sessions or training materials you’d like to see included?  We’d like to hear both from people who have engaged with the RKEDF and those who haven’t.

Tell us what you think via our survey and be in with a chance of winning one of three £20 Amazon vouchers.  The deadline date is Sunday 15 March.

New Writing Academy to Develop Your Writing Skills

Tuesday 13th April – Thursday 15th April

The three-day Writing Academy will enable you to develop the skills required to improve the quantity and quality of your publications and to develop a publication strategy which best represents you as an academic.

The academy is a great opportunity for academics who are new to publishing or would benefit from some additional direction and coaching.

You’ll have access to an external consultant who will advise you on techniques and style. You will also have the opportunity to discuss your ideas and issues with your peers.

The program and objectives for Writing Academies are as follows:

  • Day 1. Planning and writing your research article
  • Day 2. Developing a Strategy for Getting Your Articles Published, Read and Cited
  • Day 3. Writing Day – to put into action everything discussed over the proceeding days

You will also have the opportunity to discuss your publishing goals and prepare a plan to accommodate writing within your day to day routines.

The trainer for the Writing Academy is Patrick Brindle.

Patrick divides his time between his training and consultancy business – Into Content – and his work for City, University of London. At City he is Programme Director on the Publishing MA and International Publishing MA. Patrick has a PhD in History from Cambridge University, and has worked in editorial positions across the social sciences at Pearson Education, Oxford University Press and SAGE Publications.  Patrick provides staff and PhD level training on book and research paper writing, and on general publishing strategy, to a range of universities, including Oxford, UCL, Leicester, Royal Holloway, the SRHE and the ESRC’s National Centre for Research Methods. He also has a specialism in helping academics in writing about methodology.

If you are interested in booking a place, please contact RKEDF@bournemouth.ac.uk.

BRIAN Training

Nominating your outputs for the REF mock exercise

Thursday 27th February 14:00 -15:00 Talbot

BRIAN (Bournemouth Research Information And Networking) is BU’s publication management system.

BRIAN is also used to capture information regarding outputs to be submitted to the REF2021, and to the mock exercises related to REF2021.

This usage of BRIAN is the focus of this training session.

See here to book. Contact RKEDF@bournemouth.ac.uk if you have any queries.