Skip to main content

Category / research methods

REDCap – Recommended tools for Data Management in Research Projects

Events, research methods, Research news, research staff, Research Training, Training, Uncategorized

Recommended tools for Data Management in Research Projects

4 December 2024, 09:00 -13:00 Book here

Learn about data collection and management best practices in research and why REDCap is better that MS Excel or Qualtrics for almost every type of data collection, either through online surveys or direct entry into a database.

Our REDCap expert (Will Crocombe) will show you why this tool has been used in 2.2 million research projects worldwide to date, and with no prior knowledge, you will learn to use REDCap and be ready to use it in your next investigation at the end of this course.

Attendees on the basic course will learn:

What is REDCap and why is it important?

  • What can REDCap do and who uses it. Data management expectations, data integrity and quality, safety and security.

Data collection forms and data entry – the basics

  • Understand basics of field types and form design, build a simple study and add some data. Review form status and dashboard.

Improving usability

  • Data range checks, action tags, field skipping, option lists, calculated fields.
  • Use of Data Quality Rules, inbuilt and custom, calculations.

Data import and export

  • Data export options and format. Import features and use as data editor.
  • Data Dictionary and metadata.

So why use REDCap?

REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) is a secure, web-based software platform designed for building and managing online surveys and databases. Originally developed at Vanderbilt University, it has become widely used all over the world in academic, non-profit, and government institutions, particularly for research and clinical data management.

REDCap is considered better than Microsoft Excel for data collection and management because it is more secure, offers better data quality, and is easier to use.

Qualtrics and REDCap are both easy to use, but REDCap is more customisable and supports data entry workflows, including multiple user roles and permissions, which are particularly useful in collaborative research teams. Additionally, REDCap supports audit trails for data entries and changes, critical for research reproducibility. Qualtrics can be expensive, especially to access advanced features, while all features in REDCap are free.

For further information on this event please contact RKEDF@bournemouth.ac.uk

Book here

REDCap Key Features:

  1. Data Collection: REDCap allows users to easily create and manage data collection forms, which can be used for various purposes like surveys, longitudinal studies, or clinical trials.
  2. User-Friendly Interface: It provides an intuitive, web-based interface for project setup and data entry, allowing non-technical users to create complex projects without needing programming skills.
    1. Easy to Design Forms: REDCap provides a user-friendly interface for creating and designing online surveys and databases without needing advanced programming skills.
    2. Drag-and-Drop Interface: Allows for easy form building and question arrangement.
  3. Secure and Compliant: REDCap supports HIPAA compliance and other data security standards as GDPR and FISMA, making it suitable for handling sensitive or protected health information (PHI).
  4. Customisability: Users can customize forms, surveys, and workflows to suit their project needs, and it supports branching logic, validation, and automated alerts.
    1. Flexible Form Design: You can create complex branching logic, calculated fields, and use piping to personalize questions.
    2. Autonomy for Researchers: Users can independently design and manage their projects without needing IT support.
  5. Collaboration: It enables collaboration across institutions, allowing multiple users with different permission levels to work on the same project.
  6. Longitudinal Data Collection: It supports collecting data over time from the same participants, which is important for research projects that involve repeated measurements.
  7. Shared Library: REDCap’s Shared Library allows users to browse and search for data entry forms that other users have uploaded.
  8. Data Export: Data collected in REDCap can be exported to various statistical software formats (e.g., SPSS, SAS, Stata, R) for analysis

Student Research Opportunity

BU research, Fusion, humanities, Impact, international, Knowledge Exchange, Research Integritiy, research methods, Research news, research opportunities, Student Engagement, student research

As the new academic year begins, so does the recruitment process for a new cohort of Missing Persons Indicator Project researchers. This year, as well as recruiting law students to the project, we are presenting this opportunity to budding researchers across the university. Notably, a new collaboration between the FMC and BUBS has emerged, enhancing the interdisciplinary approach of the project.

 

In collaboration with the International Commission on Missing Persons, students have begun the process of collating indicators to capture the way States engage with, and seek to solve, missing persons cases. These indicators range from understanding contextual factors that could have contributed to a surge of missing persons cases, such as conflict or natural disasters, to international treaty ratification, to domestic legislation.

 

In light of recent headlines concerning conflicts across the globe, students have likely been exposed to stories that highlight the pressing issues of our time, such as missing persons. This voluntary research project offers them a unique opportunity to engage with work that has real-world significance, showing how research can extend beyond the university to make a meaningful impact.

 

Our expectations:

  • Dedicate approximately 8 hours a month to the project (flexible around university commitments).
  • Attend in-person meetings, skills workshops and data collating sessions.
  • Be keen to develop research skills.
  • Work respectfully within a diverse team.

 

 

Student experience:

  • Support into real-world research with lasting impact.
  • Assist in articulating the project into written form to enhance employability.
  • Optional research skills workshops.
  • Inter-disciplinary learning.
  • Feedback opportunities.
  • A well-stocked snack cupboard.

 

If you feel this opportunity would benefit students in your faculty, discipline, or program, please email indicators@bournemouth.ac.uk to request the necessary recruitment paperwork or to arrange a drop-in talk for your students.

 

Upcoming BU systematic review training

Awarded & submitted bids, BU research, PG research, Postgraduate Research, Publishing, research methods, Research Training, writing

With the upcoming Bournemouth University  systematic review module co-ordinated lead by Prof. Vanora Hundley, the following announcement was timely today:

Your article reached 400 reads

Article: Evidence-based health care in Nepal: The importance of systematic reviews

The systematic review course is part of the INSIGHT programme.

 

Reference:

  1. van Teijlingen, E. R., Simkhada, B., Ireland, J.C., Simkhada, P. P., Bruce, J. (2012). Evidence-based health care in Nepal: The importance of systematic reviews. Nepal Journal of Epidemiology, 1(4), 114–118. https://doi.org/10.3126/nje.v1i4.5498

Presenting Studies on LLMs Reasoning Capabilities in Sentiment Analysis of Mass-Media texts at NLPSummit-2024

BU research, conferences, Events, Knowledge Exchange, research methods, Uncategorized

 

As a part of reseach studies in Natural Langauge Processing (NLP) field, this year I am delighted to present the most recent advances of Generative AI in it at NLPSummit-2024. The 5’th summit represents a free online conference September 24-26, hosted by JohnSnowLabs. The conference is dedicated to showcase the best practices, real-world case studies and challanges in Generative AI for Natural Language Processing.

By joining to my talk you become aware of how Large Language Models (LLMs) could be applied for retrieving implicit information from non-structured texts. Sentiment Analysis represent one of such problems, and as a task aimed at extraction of the hidden opinion of the author towards objects mentioned in text. We start by discovering reasoning capabilities of the most popular Large Language Models (ChatGPT, Mistral, Gemma, Microsoft-Phi, and more) out-of-the-box to show their limitations in retrieving authors opinion from Mass-media texts. To address the existed limitations in models reasoning capabilities 🧠 , we cover Chain-of-Thought technique and explore the way of its proper adaptiation in Sentiment Analysis. It is worth to note that the techniques, to be covered, could be distributed and adapted in the other domains that go beyond Mass-media. Such domains include but are not limited to: medical (adverse drug reaction), literature (fictional chatbot development), conversational (emotion extaction / empathy mapping).

These advances were achieved while at Centre for Applied Creative Technologies CfACTs+ by working on “Marking Medical Image Reports Automatically with Natural Language Processing (NLP-MMI)” project.

The keylinks realted to the event and presentation in particular, are as follows:

📍 Event page: https://www.nlpsummit.org/nlp-summit-2024/
⏰ When: 24-26 September 2024 (Online)
⭐ Project: https://github.com/nicolay-r/Reasoning-for-Sentiment-Analysis-Framework

Dr. Nicolay Rusnachenko
Research Fellow at Centre For Applied Creative Technologies PLUS (CFACT+)
Bournemouth University

New qualitative research methods paper now online

BU research, Featured academics, Fusion themes, international, open access, Publishing, Research communication, research integrity, research methods, Research Training, Training, Uncategorized, writing

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

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

 

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

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

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMWH

 

References:

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

New Book and Web Toolkit: Practice-led Research and Inclusive Media Representations

BU research, Impact, research methods

Documentary and Stereotypes: Reducing Stigma through Factual Media (Palgrave 2023) and its accompanying web toolkit by Principal Lecturer Catalin Brylla are available.

This book studies how social stigma and prejudice can be reduced through factual media, including documentaries, news, reality TV, advertisements and social media videos. It is intended for researchers and media makers who want to increase social inclusion and diversity through strategic on-screen representations. Using models from social psychology, media studies and cultural studies, it explains how harmful social boundaries can be reduced in relation to ethnicity, culture, age, disability, gender, sexual orientation, religion and many other social categories.

The first part explains the function of stereotypes in social perception and cognition, whether we meet a person in real life or watch a TV documentary. The second part establishes a classification system for stigmatising media stereotypes, and it proposes a methodology to analyse these in narrative and audio-visual representations. The third part introduces a framework of methods to reduce stigmatising stereotypes and foster social inclusion. These are based on experiencing the perspective of screen characters and the strategic intersection of multiple social identities.

The book and web toolkit have been widely disseminated:

Society of Cognitive Film Studies Conference 2024 (University of North Carolina, Wilmington)

Masterclass: Catalin Brylla and Edward Schiappa in conversation about Reducing Prejudice through Documentary: The Parasocial Contact Hypothesis (University College London)

Intersectional Media Representation Workshop at the Festival of Media Production 2024 (Bournemouth University)

Inclusive Filmmaking Workshop (School of Creative Practice, Queensland University of Technology)

Reducing Prejudice through Documentary Practice (Steve Tisch School of Film and Television, Tel Aviv University)

Reducing Disability Stigma through Intersectional Media Representations (Centre of Culture and Disability Studies, Liverpool Hope University)

Positionality in qualitative research

BU research, Featured academics, international, open access, Publishing, research methods, Research Training, student research, Uncategorized, Women's Academic Network, writing

At the online editorial board meeting today [Saturday 29th June] of the Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology I had the pleasure of seeing Bournemouth University’s latest paper ‘The Importance of Positionality for Qualitative Researchers’ ahead of publication [1].  The lead author of this paper is Hannah Gurr and this methodology paper is part of her M.Res. research project in Social Work.  Hannah is supervised by Dr. Louise Oliver, Dr. Orlanda Harvey and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences (FHSS).

Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology is a Gold Open Access journal so when it appears online it will be free to read for anybody across the globe.

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health

Reference:

  1. Gurr, H., Oliver, L., Harvey, O., van Teijlingen, E. (2024) The Importance of Positionality for Qualitative Researchers, Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology 18 (forthcoming)

FHSS academics’ paper cited 1,000 times

BU research, Featured academics, humanities, international, Publishing, Research communication, research methods, Research news, Training, Uncategorized, writing

This morning ResearchGate alerted us that our paper published two decades ago ‘The Importance of Pilot Studies’ has now been cited one thousand times [1].  This methods paper in the Nursing Standard is very often used by authors quoting a  paper in their research methods section when they have done pilot or feasibility study for a larger-scale study. This paper is also our second top cited paper with 1,982 citations on Google Scholar and, interestingly enough, on SCOPUS it is not listed at all.

Pilot studies are a crucial element of a good study design. Conducting a pilot study does not guarantee success in the main study, but it does increase the likelihood of success. Pilot studies fulfill a range of important functions and can provide valuable insights for other researchers. There is a need for more discussion among researchers of both the process and outcomes of pilot studies. 

This paper is one of several methods paper focusing on pilot studies we have published over the past 22 years [2-8].

 

Professors Vanora Hundley & Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health

 

 

References:

  1. van Teijlingen E, Hundley, V. (2002) ‘The importance of pilot studies’ Nursing Standard 16(40): 33-36. Web: nursing-standard.co.uk/archives/vol16-40/pdfs/vol16w40p3336.pdf
  2. van Teijlingen E, Rennie, AM., Hundley, V, Graham, W. (2001) The importance of conducting & reporting pilot studies: example of Scottish Births Survey, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 34: 289-95.
  3. Simkhada, P, Bhatta, P., van Teijlingen E (2006) Importance of piloting questionnaire on sexual health research (Letter), Wilderness & Environmental Medical Journal, 17(4): 295-96. wemjournal.org/wmsonline/?request=get-document&issn=1080-6032&volume=017&issue=04&page=0295#Ref
  4. van Teijlingen E, Hundley, V. (2001) The importance of pilot studies, Social Research Update Issue 35, (Editor N. Gilbert), Guildford: University of Surrey.  Web:  http://www.soc.surrey.ac.uk/sru/SRU35.html
  5. Hundley, V., van Teijlingen E.
  6. van Teijlingen E, Hundley, V. (2005) Pilot studies in family planning & reproductive health care, Journal of Family Planning & Reproductive Health Care 31(3): 219-21.
  7. (2002) The role of pilot studies in midwifery research RCM Midwives Journal 5(11): 372-74.
  8. van Teijlingen E, Hundley, V. (2003) Pilot study, In: Encyclopaedia of Social Science Research Methods, Vol. 2, Lewis-Beck, M., Bryman, A. & Liao, T. (eds.), Orego, Sage: 823-24.

 

The Missing Persons Indicator Project: Research Collaboration for Knowledge Exchange

BU research, HEIF, humanities, Impact, Industry collaboration, international, Knowledge Exchange, Knowledge Exchange and Impact Team, Knowledge Transfer, policy, Research communication, Research Integritiy, research methods, Research news, research opportunities, student research

The Missing Persons Indicator Project, initiated several years ago by Professor Melanie Klinkner and Andreas Kleiser from the ICMP, has recently been enhanced by a visit to the ICMP, aimed at optimising knowledge exchange. Its goal is to showcase each state’s relationship with missing persons through comprehensive data analysis. This initiative began as a collaborative effort, with data gathering undertaken by undergraduate students at Bournemouth University, engaging students in real-world research and ensuring the project’s sustainability by welcoming new students each September.

Since its inception, the project has been fortunate to work with many enthusiastic students who have completed the first round of Structural Indicator 1. This indicator demonstrates the commitment of states to international legal instruments. The table below outlines the current indicators involved in our data collection process:

Context Indicator A qualitative assessment as to whether the state has experienced extraordinary events that may be correlated to a rise in missing persons cases.
Structural Indicator 1 The commitment shown by states to international legal instruments is an indicator of their duties and obligation in relation to missing persons.
Structural Indicator 2 Domestic legislation by states as an indicator of their duties and obligation in relation to missing persons.
Structural Indicator 3 Institutional framework(s) established by states as an indicator of their duties, obligation, and enactment of legislation in relation to missing persons.

Thanks to HEIF funding, the Missing Persons Indicator Project recently had the opportunity to employ four student volunteers over the past two weeks. Their task was to accelerate the data collation for these indicators. By working through each indicator on a state-by-state basis, they developed a comprehensive understanding of each state’s unique situation. This method also allowed them to recognise and utilise specific details that might recur across the different indicators.

Every day, a designated “data-checker” reviewed previously inputted data to identify and correct any anomalies. This rigorous review process ensures the data’s accuracy, ethical integrity, and suitability for international dissemination.

Throughout this process, the students have been deeply engaged, asking insightful questions that challenged our perspectives and prompted us to consider aspects we might have overlooked. The atmosphere has been a hub of activity and intellectual growth.

We are extremely grateful for the hard work and dedication of our student researchers. Their contributions have demonstrated that a student ‘data-lab’ is an excellent model for conducting research and achieving meaningful results.

As this term draws to a close, we are keen to alert teaching staff to the potential for their students to join the Missing Person Indicator project in September as we recruit a new cohort for the new academic year. To learn more about the project please visit our website!

New guide to Practice-Based Research published today!

BU research, research methods, student research

Book cover image with title, subtitle, author. Background is variegated orange, with the white outline of a human figure holding an upside-down light bulb.Designing and Conducting Practice-Based Research Projects: A Practical Guide for Arts Student Researchers by Bournemouth University Associate Professor Lyle Skains is available from today.

The book is aimed primarily at upper undergraduate and Master’s students undertaking practice-based research in the arts, though it is also suitable for PhD candidates and researchers and supervisors new to practice-based research projects.

The discussion starts with definitions and a brief background to practice-related research in the arts and contextualization of practice-based methods within that frame. The bulk of the text is a step-by-step approach to designing, conducting, and writing-up practice-based research projects; each step is supplemented with examples of practice-related research, exercises for progressing methods design and evaluating research approach, and lists for further reading.

Designing and Conducting Practice-Based Research Projects has been requested and should soon be available through the Bournemouth University Library.

Paper with 160,000 reads

BU research, Featured academics, Publishing, research methods, Uncategorized, writing

Occasionally we have the pleasure to announce that one of our papers has been read 300 times or 2,000 times or has been cited 40 times.  However, some papers are in a different category.  Today ResearchGate informed us  that our 2002 paper ‘The Importance of Pilot Studies’ [1] has been read 160,000 times.  This paper was written over two decades ago and submitted to the Nursing Standard when we were both still at the University of Aberdeen in Scotland.

 

Profs. Vanora Hundley & Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health (CMWH)

 

Reference:

  1. van Teijlingen, E, Hundley, V (2002) The Importance of Pilot Studies, Nursing Standard, 16(40):33-6