Tagged / BU research

How to plan for impact from your research: sign up now for new training!

Training

Planning for impact: Thursday 2nd December, 9.30-11.30

Do you want to ensure your research has real-world impact? Would you like to understand how to integrate impact into your project plan to enhance the chance of getting funding? This new online impact training session provides the tools and insights you need.

Impact consultant Saskia Gent, director of Insights for Impact, explores how to plan for impact throughout the research lifecycle.  The session addresses the key elements of impact planning by asking five questions:  why, who, what, how and how do we know?

This approach enables you to consider your impact goals, identify relevant beneficiaries and stakeholders, plan engagement activities and consider evidence requirements and opportunities.

Sign up here.

This session is useful for you, whichever stage of your research career you are at, and ECRs are welcome to attend.  You are also encouraged to attend if you are considering applying for the Research Impact Fund (which closes 10th December).

 

Bournemouth research cited in The Sunday Times

international, Publishing, writing

Today Bournemouth University’s research on Nepali migrant workers and kidney problems was cited in The Sunday Times. In the preparation for the Qatar 2022 men’s football world cup The Sunday Times published an article under the title ‘Dying for the World Cup‘.

Dr. Pramod Regmi and Dr. Nirmal Aryal were awarded funding from GCRF (The Global Challenges Research Fund) and Bournemouth University’s QR fund.  This work resulted in an editorial highlighting that low-skilled migrant workers in the Middle Wast and Malaysia are at a disproportionately higher risk of kidney problems. The working conditions are often Dirty, Dangerous and Difficult (referred at as the 3Ds) include physically demanding work, exposure to a hot environment, dehydration, chemical exposures, excessive use of pain killers, and lifestyle factors (such as restricted water intake and a high intake of alcohol/sugary drinks) which may precipitate them to acute kidney injuries and subsequent chronic kidney disease [1].  And recently, a national survey of nephrologists (kidney specialists) on their perceptions of the size of the problem of kidney health in Nepali migrant workers [2].

 

 

References:

  1. Aryal, N., Regmi, P.R., Sedhain, A., KC, R.K., Martinez Faller, E., Rijal, A., van Teijlingen, E. (2021). Kidney health risk of migrant workers: An issue we can no longer overlook. Health Prospect 21(1): 15-17.
  2. Aryal, N., Sedhain, A., Regmi, P., KC, R. K., van Teijlingen, E. (2021). Risk of kidney health among returnee Nepali migrant workers: A survey of nephrologists. Asian Journal of Medical Sciences 12(12), 126–132.

 

Not going in!

international, Publishing, writing

Yesterday I had the pleasure of attending the online workshop ‘500 Years of Childbirth’ together with by CMMPH (Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health) colleges Dr. Juliet Wood and Dr. Laura Iannuzzi. The session ‘500 Years of Childbirth’ was part of Being Human Festival, the UK’s national festival of the humanities which runs 11–20 November 2021.  History has always been a passion of me, and the presenters, Julia Martins and Carly Lokrheim, linked early modern history with childbirth in the 21st century. 

This wonderful session reminded me of my draft chapter I wrote for my PhD thesis three decades ago.  My thesis A social or medical model of childbirth? : comparing the arguments in Grampian (Scotland) and the Netherlands at the University of Aberdeen was supervised by Dr. Peter McCaffery.  Peter wisely said to me: “You really needed to write this chapter to make sense of the history of midwifery in your head, but it does not really fit the thesis.”  He added: “You have too many words already.  You know that it is not going in?” The material of this history chapter was not lost as I used loads of text from it it in the introduction section for a textbook [1].  The section ‘History of Midwifery: Introduction’ became part of our edited volume Midwifery and the Medicalization of Childbirth: Comparative Perspectives (Nova Science Publishers, Inc., Huntington, New York, USA) [2].

It is a message I occasionally repeat to my own PhD students.  Under the circumstances I may fing myself saying things like “This is something you had to get of your chest, or you had to write it to make sense of it, but as it stands do you think it fits your argument?”  Or more subtly in a supervision meeting, tell us: “What does this section add to your overall story in the thesis?”

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

References:

  1. van Teijlingen, E. (2004) History of Midwifery: Introduction, In: van Teijlingen, E. Lowis, G., et al. (eds.), Midwifery & the Medicalization of Childbirth, NY: Nova Sci., pages: 43-52.
  2. van Teijlingen , E., Lowis, G., McCaffery, P. & Porter, M. (eds.) (2004) Midwifery and the Medicalization of Childbirth: Comparative Perspectives, New York: Nova Science. [Paperback ISBN: 1-59454-0314].

Apply now: the Research Impact Fund is open for 2021/22!

Funding opportunities

We are pleased to announce that the Research Impact Fund is now open for applications.

This call is for researchers at all stages of their careers to support the planning and development of impact from new or ongoing research. For 2021/22, the fund has been split into two strands:

Strand 1: To support the development of new research partnerships and networks, to lay the groundwork for future research projects.

Strand 2: To provide support for emerging impact from existing underpinning research.

Who can apply?

Strand 1 is aimed at early career researchers (those who are within 7 years of completing their doctorate, or equivalent experience, and are not associate professors / professors) and staff who are new to research (academic staff who have not published an academic output, or received internal or external funding for research). The funding aims to support colleagues to engage with key stakeholders at the very beginning of the research process, to establish partnerships and networks to support the co-creation of research questions. The panel would like to fund multiple projects and therefore particularly welcome applications for projects up to £2,000.

Strand 2 is aimed at academic staff with existing research which has the potential for impact, or is starting to result in impact. The funding aims to support the development of research impact across BU and begin to identify potential case studies for post-REF2021 exercises. The panel would like to fund multiple projects and therefore particularly welcome applications for projects up to £4,000.

What we’re looking for

Applicants need to demonstrate a clear understanding of how their research – whether proposed or existing – can lead to impact. The UKRI defines research impact as “an effect on, change or benefit to the economy, society, culture, public policy or services, health, the environment or quality of life, beyond academia”.

For strand 1, the emphasis is on establishing and developing relationships with partners, organisations and research users that will lead to impact in the future. This may involve:

  • Collaborating with partners to apply for external funding
  • The co-creation of research questions
  • Building relationships with policymakers and policy brokers
  • Creating a stakeholder advisory group to suggest additional activities for achieving impact, as well as reviewing and providing feedback on proposed activities.

With strand 2, the focus is on maximising the potential of existing research by identifying activities that will translate outputs into impact/s.

This may include, but is not limited to:

  • Developing printed and digital resources
  • Collating further data sets
  • Creating briefings and information leaflets for policymakers
  • Updating and developing websites to disseminate findings and encourage/monitor use
  • Identifying additional potential beneficiaries and stakeholders
  • Undertaking media activity to raise awareness, change opinions or attitudes, mobilise action or influence decisions by people with power.
  • Creating new methods of engagement with the research findings, e.g., video, podcasts, apps etc.
  • Developing associated educational resources based on insights.

Application process

To apply, please first read the policy and guidance notes. Then submit the relevant online form. PDF versions are supplied so that you may preview the form, but must not be submitted:

Strand 1 application form

Strand 1 application form pdf version

Strand 2 application form

Strand 2 application form PDF version

Applications must be submitted by Friday 10th December.

If you have any questions about your application, please email Amanda Edwards.

Applicants are strongly advised to attend the surgery session on applying for internal funding for impact and public engagement on Thursday 18 November and / or book a 1-2-1 session with an Impact Advisor. Find out more about the surgery and book a place here.

BU’s Research Principles

Putting the Research Impact Fund into strategic context, under BU2025, the following funding panels operate to prioritise applications for funding and make recommendations to the Research Performance and Management Committee (RPMC).

There are eight funding panels:

  1. HEIF Funding Panel
  2. GCRF Funding Panel
  3. Research Impact Funding Panel
  4. Doctoral Studentship Funding Panel
  5. ACORN Funding Panel
  6. Research Fellowships Funding Panel
  7. Charity Support Funding Panel
  8. SIA Funding panel

Please see further announcements regarding each initiative.

These panels align with the BU2025 focus on research, including BU’s Research Principles.  Specifically, but not exclusively, regarding the Research Impact Funding Panel, please refer to:

  • Principle 5 – which sets of the context for such funding panels,
  • Principle 6 and Outcome 9 – which recognises the need for interdisciplinarity and the importance of social science and humanities (SSH).

Paper published outlining good practice for receiving informed consent

NHS, Publishing, Research Ethics, Training

A paper has been published by Hugh Davies (Chair, Oxford A NHS Research Ethics Committee) and the members of Oxford A Research Ethics Committee (REC) which includes a model for what the REC considers to be good practice in terms of consent for research participation. The paper proposes that there are four simple steps which consent processes should be built around:

  • Step 1: Introducing the study and the choices: helping the potential participants get an overview of the proposal and introducing the key issues.
  • Step 2: Explaining all the details of the study using the detailed Participant Information Sheet.
  • Step 3: After a gap, if necessary, reviewing and checking understanding.
  • Step 4: Reaching agreement and recording consent.

The paper outlines common issues such as information provision to participants, inadequate public involvement, and lack of proportionality.

You can access the paper here.

Remember that RDS offers training in informed consent, as does the National Institute for Health Research. If you are interested in accessing this training, please email Research Ethics.

Template documents are also available via the Health Research Authority website.

Reminder: The Funding Development Briefing will be on Wednesday at 12 noon – Spotlight: NIHR Fellowship

Funding opportunities

Reminder: The Funding Development Briefing will be on Wednesday at 12 noon. The spotlight will be on the NIHR Fellowships.

We will cover:

  • Overview of the process, explain acronyms, highlight resources available etc.
  • Q & A

For those unable to attend, the session will be recorded and shared on Brightspace here.

Invites for these sessions have been disseminated via your Heads of Department.

Academic publishing and numbers

Centre for Excellence in Learning, international, Training, writing

Yesterday our team published new paper on academic writing, this time the focus was on the various indices in the field.  Academics from three different departments in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences collaborated on the paper ‘Publishing, identifiers & metrics: Playing the numbers game‘ [1].  The three BU scholars, Dr Shovita Dhakal Adhikari, in the Social Sciences and Social Work Department, Dr. Pramod Regmi in the Department of Nursing Sciences, and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen in the Department of Midwifery and Health Sciences co-authored the paper with former BU staff Dr. Nirmal Aryal, now researcher at Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Alexander van Teijlingen, PhD student at the University of Strathclyde (Glasgow), and Dr. Sarita Panday, Lecturer in Public Health in the University of Essex.

This a the latest paper in a long line of publications on aspects of academic writing and publishing [2-16].

References:

  1. van Teijlingen, E.R., Dhakal Adhikari, S., Regmi, P.R., van Teijlingen, A., Aryal, N., Panday, S. (2021). Publishing, identifiers & metrics: Playing the numbers game. Health Prospect, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.3126/hprospect.v20i1.37391
  2. Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen E., Hundley, V., Simkhada, BD. (2013) Writing an Abstract for a Scientific Conference, Kathmandu Univ Med J 11(3): 262-65. http://www.kumj.com.np/issue/43/262-265.pdf
  3. van Teijlingen, E, Hundley, V. (2002) Getting your paper to the right journal: a case study of an academic paper, J Advanced Nurs 37(6): 506-11.
  4. Pitchforth, E, Porter M, Teijlingen van E, Keenan Forrest, K. (2005) Writing up & presenting qualitative research in family planning & reproductive health care, J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 31(2): 132-135.
  5. van Teijlingen, E, Simkhada, PP, Rizyal A (2012) Submitting a paper to an academic peer-reviewed journal, where to start? (Guest Editorial) Health Renaissance 10(1): 1-4.
  6. van Teijlingen, E, Simkhada. PP, Simkhada, B, Ireland J. (2012) The long & winding road to publication, Nepal J Epidemiol 2(4): 213-215 http://nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/article/view/7093/6388
  7. Hundley, V, van Teijlingen, E, SimkhadP (2013) Academic authorship: who, why and in what order? Health Renaissance 11(2):98-101 www.healthrenaissance.org.np/uploads/Download/vol-11-2/Page_99_101_Editorial.pdf
  8. Simkhada P, van Teijlingen E, Hundley V. (2013) Writing an academic paper for publication, Health Renaissance 11(1):1-5. www.healthrenaissance.org.np/uploads/Pp_1_5_Guest_Editorial.pdf
  9. van Teijlingen, E., Ireland, J., Hundley, V., Simkhada, P., Sathian, B. (2014) Finding the right title for your article: Advice for academic authors, Nepal J Epidemiol 4(1): 344-347.
  10. van Teijlingen E., Hundley, V., Bick, D. (2014) Who should be an author on your academic paper? Midwifery 30: 385-386.
  11. Hall, J., Hundley, V., van Teijlingen, E. (2015) The journal editor: friend or foe? Women & Birth 28(2): e26-e29.
  12. Sathian, B., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Roy, B, Banerjee, I. (2016) Grant writing for innovative medical research: Time to rethink. Med Sci 4(3):332-33.
  13. Adhikari, S. D., van Teijlingen, E. R., Regmi, P. R., Mahato, P., Simkhada, B., & Simkhada, P. P. (2020). The Presentation of Academic Self in The Digital Age: The Role of Electronic Databases. International J Soc Sci Management, 7(1), 38-41. https://doi.org/10.3126/ijssm.v7i1.27405
  14. Pradhan, AK, van Teijlingen, ER. (2017) Predatory publishing: a great concern for authors, Med Sci 5(4): 43.
  15. van Teijlingen, E (2004), Why I can’t get any academic writing done, Medical Sociol News 30(3): 62-63. britsoc.co.uk/media/26334/MSN_Nov_2004.pd
  16. Wasti, S.P., van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P., Hundley, V. with Shreesh, K. Writing and Publishing Academic Work, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books

Midwifery paper co-produced with BU students

NHS, student research, writing

Congratulations to Faculty of Health & Social Sciences (FHSS) staff and students on their latest publication in the international journal Midwifery (published by Elsevier).   FHSS Professors Carol Clark and Vanora Hundley, undergraduate student researcher Guste Kalanaviciute and CMMPH PhD student Vanessa Bartholomew and Professor Helen Cheyne from the University of Stirling recently had the following paper accepted: ‘Exploring pain characteristics in nulliparous women; a precursor to developing support for women in the latent phase of labour’ [1].

 

Reference:

Clark C, Kalanaviciute G, Bartholomew V, Cheyne H, Hundley VA (2021) Exploring pain characteristics in nulliparous women; a precursor to developing support for women in the latent phase of labour. Midwifery (in press) 

Are you a peer reviewer or a funding panel member?

Research Development and Support (RDS) would like to understand more about BU academics’ expertise in reviewing external grant applications and funding panel experience. As part of this we are collecting information about the external funding panels that BU academics are members of.

We will use the information gathered through this survey to create a database of funding panel expertise, which may be used to approach relevant academics for their expertise in particular funding calls for internal initiatives.

If you are a reviewer or external funding panel member, we would be extremely grateful if you could please complete this brief survey by Friday 5th November:

Complete the survey here

New Research Impact Fund call launching soon

Funding opportunities

The next round of the Research Impact Fund will be launched in early November

This funding is open to researchers at all stages of their careers, whether building relationships for future research projects, or seeking to realise the real-world changes their existing research could make.

The Research Impact Fund will:

  • Deliver support for developing impact
  • Improve the culture of research impact
  • Create a pipeline of potential case studies for future assessment exercises
  • Reward and recognise the efforts of those working towards developing the impact of their research.

For the 2021-22 call there will be two main strands:

Strand 1: Supporting the development of impact – aimed at early career researchers or those new to research / impact

The aim of this strand is to support the development of new partnerships and networks. These will lay the groundwork for future research projects which start with considering how to meet the needs of key stakeholders with proposed research questions.

Strand 2: Supporting areas of emerging impact

This will be used to support academic staff who have evidence of underpinning research and evidence of the impact potential of this research. The aim is to develop and accelerate research impact and support the creation of an impact pipeline in preparation for future REF exercises.

In addition, a small travel fund will be available throughout the year that will facilitate relationship building with external stakeholders such as policymakers or industry contacts, and can lead to impact development.

Details of the full call will follow early next month. In the meantime, for any informal enquires about the fund, please email Research Impact.

You can watch a short video introduction to impact here.

“Research impact is the good that researchers can do in the world.”
Mark Reed, Fast Track Impact