Category / writing

Upcoming BU systematic review training

Awarded & submitted bids, PG research, Publishing, 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

Congratulations to BU Visiting Faculty Dr Ans Luyben

international, Publishing, writing

Congratulations to Dr. Ans Luyben on the publication of her latest midwifery article ‘How to promote midwives’ recognition and professional autonomy? A document analysis study’ [1]. This latest paper will appear in the forthcoming November issue of the international scientific journal Midwifery, published by Elsevier. 

The paper identified challenges in Belgian midwives’ recognition and professional autonomy and provided recommendations to address them, emphasizing the importance of recognized authority in midwifery. Implementing these recommendations can positively impact midwives’ recognition and autonomy in Belgium as well as in other countries.  Ans has long been affiliated with the Centre of Midwifery & Women’s Health (CMWH) as Visiting Faculty and she works in the Frauenzentrum (Centre for Women’s Health), Lindenhofgruppe, Bern, Switzerland.

Well done!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

 

 

Reference:

  1. Vermeulen, J., Buyl, R., Luyben, A., Fleming, V., Tency, I., Fobelets, M. (2024) How to promote midwives’ recognition and professional autonomy? A document analysis study Midwifery, 138: 104138.  

Paper with a difference

international, open access, Publishing, writing

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

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

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

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health

 

References:

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

Congratulations to Heidi Singelton & Steve Ersser

Publishing, writing

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

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

 

Well done!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMWH

Reference:

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

First EPPOCH study paper accepted for publication

open access, Publishing, writing

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

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

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health

 

 

Reference:

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

New publication Dr. Pramod Regmi

international, open access, writing

Congratulations to Dr. Pramod Regmi on the publication of his latest Open Access paper ‘Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life of Stroke Survivors in Southeast Communities in Nigeria’ [1].  Dr. Regmi is based in the Centre for  for Wellbeing & Long-Term Health.   The paper’s co-authors include Dr. Folashade Alloh, who completed her PhD studies at Bournemouth University a few years ago.

Well done!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

 

Reference:

  1. Adigwe GA, Alloh F, Smith P, Tribe R, Regmi P. Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life of Stroke Survivors in Southeast Communities in Nigeria. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2024; 21(9):1116. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21091116

New midwifery publication

NHS, PG research, Publishing, writing

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

Well done!

 

Reference:

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

New qualitative research methods paper now online

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

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

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

 

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

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

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMWH

 

References:

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