Latest research and knowledge exchange news at Bournemouth University
The Health Research Authority have published some questions and answers in relation to student research – this is in relation to the recent update regarding the upcoming changes to eligibility criteria.
You can find the Q&As here.
If you have any queries please contact Suzy Wignall, Clinical Governance Advisor in Research Development & Support.
Last night I misread a call from BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth. To be fair the email included two different request to contribute to two different kinds of blog posts with different set of instructions. Of course, I managed not to simply to swap these instructions around, but mix them up properly. The result is the text below that does not fit either of the two calls, I think.
The question I tried to address was: “Tell us how your research published in BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth has links to wider issues than health!. The actual call in the email was: “Tell us about your contribution to the SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals) – We invite our Editorial Board Members who have research or personal interests related to the SDGs to contribute a blog post to our BMC Series Blog network discussing your work/interests as these relate to the SDGs”. 
My adopted question explains the title ‘Health is not a vacuum’. The short overview of the blog I drafted focused on all the papers I have published in this journal over a fifteen-year period from 2006-2021 [1-11]. Not surprising for a sociologist of health & illness, my argument is that there are nearly always issues wider than SDG 3 ‘Good health and well-being’ in the way health care/service or health policy factors affects maternity care and midwifery. Social, cultural and economic factors affect the way maternity services ares provided, used and perceived. SDG 5 ‘Gender equality’ springs to mind first, but also important is SDG 4 ‘Quality education’, especially of girls, and SDG 1 ‘No poverty’, of course strongly linked with SDG 10 ‘Reduced inequalities’.
Gender is highlighted or at least part of the argument in many of our papers in low- and middle income countries [2,3,5, 7,10,11], but also in a high-income context [1,6]. Education, both health education and education more generally, for example education levels of maternity service users, appears in several papers [1,6,8-11] whilst poverty is a key factors in several papers based on our work in Nepal [2,3,5,6,11]. Several of our papers address issues wider than health that are not strictly speaking SDG, such as paper on cultural differences in postnatal quality of life among German-speaking women living either side of the Swiss-German border [4], and of course, our paper on media and childbirth [6].
Last, but not least, all papers published in BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth are Open Access and freely available online!
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
CMMPH (Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health)
References:
Dorset ICS Innovation Hub
To help improve health and social care outcomes, equity and accessibility across Dorset, University Hospitals Dorset NHS Foundation Trust is implementing a Dorset Innovation Hub. It will seek to address the unique challenges of caring for the population of Dorset, and the need to innovate and transform care.
The Hub will support adoption of proven innovations across the Dorset ICS. It will coordinate horizon scanning approaches and prioritise which innovations to bring to Dorset for rapid adaptation and adoption, at scale. A core project team of innovation multidisciplinary professionals will be assisted by a wider well-established network of subject matter experts.
Details of the Call
The Innovation Hub recognises that there is a plethora of improvement, transformation and innovative workstreams being undertaken and it has therefore been agreed that an open call would be made to partner organisations such as Bournemouth University so that each could made one request for priority support.
Priority Support Available
The Innovation Hub is seeking to support a range of local priorities across health and social care in the process towards implementation and adoption via the following ways:
Therefore, if you have a health or social care related project that supports these local priorities and which would benefit from additional priority support to speed its implementation and adoption, you are strongly encouraged to submit your project for nomination.
Eligibility
Bournemouth University will nominate one project to go forward for priority support consideration by the Innovation Hub core project team.
Nomination assessment criteria
All projects submitted before the deadline will be evaluated using the following scoring criteria:
Application Process and Timescales
To apply, please complete and submit the application form to Lesley Hutchins (Research Commercialisation Manager) at innovate@bournemouth.ac.uk by 17:00 Friday 20 August 2021. Applications submitted after this time will not be considered.
Completed applications describing eligible projects will be reviewed by BU members of the Dorset Innovation Hub and the DDPPRs after the application deadline.
The nominated project will be informed and announced on the BU Research and Faculty blogs. BU’s nomination will be submitted to the Dorset ICS Hub for consideration on or before Tuesday 31 August 2021.
The Dorset Innovation Hub core project team will then approve which projects will be taken forward in their Tuesday 28 September 2021 meeting. If selected by the Innovation Hub, the BU nominated project’s Principal Investigators will be notified shortly thereafter.
Important: The Dorset ICS Open call for priority support may be promoted elsewhere. Please do not submit your application to any of these other portals as it will not be eligible for nomination. BU applications should only be submitted to innovate@bournemouth.ac.uk
Find out more
If you have any questions, please email Lesley Hutchins (Research Commercialisation Manager) at innovate@bournemouth.ac.uk
Yesterday Dr. Pramod Regmi, Dr. Shovita Dhakal Adhikari, Dr. Nirmal Aryal and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen, all based in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences, presented at the tenth Annual Kathmandu Conference on Nepal & the Himalaya. Their paper ‘Moral panic and othering practices during Nepal’s COVID-19 Pandemic (A study with returnee migrants and Muslims in Nepal)’ was co-authored by Dr. Sharada Prasad Wasti from the University of Huddersfield and Shreeman Sharma (Department of Conflict, Peace & Development
Studies, Tribhuvan University, Nepal). The presentation was partly based on research funded by the British Academy.
Today ResearchGate informed Prof. Vanora Hundley and I that our paper in the Nursing Standard of 2002 had reached 90,000 reads. This short methods paper called ‘The Importance of Pilot Studies’ [1] was one of our earlier attempts, nearly two decades ago, to publish more of our work in practitioners journals. This approach has been highly successful in terms of reaching a wider audience. We have written longer, more sophisticated research methods papers on pilot studies over the years, including in the Journal of Advanced Nursing, Social Research Update, and the SAGE encyclopedia on research methods [2-6], but none of these has been read or cited as often as our short paper in the Nursing Standard. 
The term ‘pilot studies’ refers to mini versions of a full-scale study (also called ‘feasibility’ studies), as well as the specific pre-testing of a particular research instrument such as a questionnaire or interview schedule. Pilot studies are a crucial element of 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.
References:
Congratulations to Faculty of Health & Social Sciences’ PhD student Karim Khaled and supervisors Prof. Vanora Hundley and Dr. Fotini Tsofliou on the acceptance of your manuscript ‘Perceived Stress was associated with Poorer Diet Quality among Women of Reproductive Age in the UK’. This paper will appear in the international journal Nutrients.All three are associated with our research unit CMMPH (Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health). This paper is supported by BU’s Open Access Fund will be freely available online soon.
Well done!
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
CMMPH
Yesterday the international journal Midwifery (published by Elsevier) announced that our paper “Male Involvement in Promotion of Safe Motherhood in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. A Scoping Review” has been published online. [1] This paper is based on Dr. Alice Ladur’s innovative PhD thesis on men’s involvement in their partners’ maternity care in Uganda. This is Alice’s second PhD paper, her first one was published in BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth. [2]
The second international midwifery paper that came out last week is ‘Slovenian midwifery professionalization: Perception of midwives and related health professions’ which appeared in the European Journal of Midwifery. [3] This paper is written with colleagues from Slovenia: Polona A. Mivšek, Majda Pahor, and Valentina Hlebec.
References:
This morning International Journal of Mental Health Nursing informed us that our article ‘Cultural issues on accessing mental health services in Nepali and Iranian migrants communities in the UK‘ has been published today. This paper is written by an interdisciplinary team including Hannah Blunt who works at Dorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust, Dr. Bibha Simkhada who is Senior Lecturer in Nursing at the University of Huddersfield and Dr. Mariam Vahdaninia who works in the Peninsula Medical School at the University of Plymouth. Both Mariam and Bibha worked with me at Bournemouth University at the time of the study.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
CMMPH (Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health)
Dr Heaslip, Dr Green, Stephen Richer (Nursing Science) and Dr Huseyin Dogan (SciTech) with Dr Simkhada (Visiting Faculty) have recently published a paper Use of Technology to Promote Health and Wellbeing of People Who Are Homeless: A Systematic Review examining current published literature around the subjects of homelessness, mobile technology usage and its impact on health.
The review noted that literature indicated that whilst a large percentage of people who are homeless owned a mobile phone or smart phone (around 80%). There were many barriers to the use of mobile technology when you are homeless and these include: physical damage to phones, theft, inability to charge phones, lack of data and the limited availability of Wi-Fi connections. The health impacts of mobile usage are largely associated with ‘social connectedness’. This not only included staying in touch with family and friends but also maintaining a connection to popular culture, social media, news, music and films. Current research indicated that this sense of social connection was considered of high importance by individuals who are homeless. As well as a social connection, people who are homeless found technology as having other potential health benefits, such as signposting to available support, reminders for appointments, prompts for taking medication, health information and online health advice.
Going forward, we are currently analysing data from an extensive 100 participant, 29 item questionnaire that has been carried out with people who are homeless locally as well as analysing qualitative data from focus groups and one to one interview (n=16 participants). This arm of our research aims to assess the availability, accessibility and utility of services for people who are homeless in the local area as well as further exploring the opportunities and challenges in utilising mobile phones to access health and social care services. Results will be published in due course and detailed in our next blog.
The HRA and the devolved administrations, supported by the Wessex Institute at the University of Southampton, have reviewed their approach to study approval for student research.
The review aimed to ensure students have the best learning experience of health and social care research, and to reduce the time that the HRA, DAs and NHS Research Ethics Committees (RECs) spend advising on and reviewing student applications.
In March 2020 the HRA paused student research approvals to create capacity for urgent COVID-19 research. Now, from 1 September 2021, they are introducing new eligibility criteria for standalone student research.
The new criteria mean that some master’s level students will be able to apply for ethics review and HRA/HCRW Approval or devolved administration equivalent. Standalone research at undergraduate level that requires ethics review and/or HRA/HCRW Approval (or devolved administration equivalent) cannot take place. Arrangements for doctoral research remain unchanged. Full details are in table one – permitted student research table. They have also made it clear when students are able to take the role of Chief Investigator, see table two – which type of students may act as Chief Investigator.
It is possible for students to learn about health and social care research without completing standalone projects. Looking at other ways to build skills and experience better reflects modern research and emphasises team science. View the video of the HRA event ‘Exploring good practice in Student Research’ to hear from course leaders about how successful these alternative approaches have been (registration is required to view) or read the HRA website for further information and ideas https://www.hra.nhs.uk/student-research/.
The HRA are giving notice now so that course leaders and students have time to prepare for the new arrangements, including ensuring that any changes to institutional policies and procedures are made.
If you have any queries about the eligibility criteria, please contact queries@hra.nhs.uk or swignall@bournemouth.ac.uk
Over the 15 months many academics have learnt to use online tools to communicate with colleagues, students, the media, politicians and the general public. The COVID-19 pandemics forced us to introduce (more) virtual classrooms, internet-based tutorials, online marking, Zoom and Teams meetings (and other platforms!) as well as online conferences and workshops, albeit each with their own limitations. In general, we often marvel about the internet and online conference technology as well as value the reduction of our carbon foot print, reaching global audiences and so on.
The past three weeks I attended three international conferences in three countries without leaving my living room, including the postponed 2020 ICM (International Confederation of Midwives) conference. 
Perhaps there is an element of online-working fatigue, but I am beginning to see more and more disadvantages of online conferences. First, the contact with fellow presenters, chairs and the audience is more superficial than at a physical conference. At a conference held in person you meet people over lunch or coffee or people simply stop you in the corridors of the conference centre to discuss or challenge your paper or express their ideas for future studies.
Secondly, many conferences seem to use two online systems and have different ways of running online conferences, at one of the recent conferences the presenters and the audience were in different cyber spaces, so as a presenter you had no idea how many people attended or how the audience reacted to what you have just said. Moreover, in one conference any questions people in the audience had written in the chat box were invisible to the speakers. These questions had to be read out by the chair, who was tasked with linking the two cyber spaces, that of speakers and that of the audience. At another conference the chair largely let the speakers deal with questions in the chat without any direction or guidance, as a consequence I was still answering questions in the chat long after the next speaker had started.
Thirdly, because I was not physically away I didn’t attend as many of the sessions at any of the three recent conferences as I would have liked to. This issue is similar in nature as the ‘old’ problem of attending a face-to-face conference at your own institution. Since you are not away your students, colleagues, etc. manage to find you and expect you to do something else instead of attending the conference. Fourthly, you don’t meet up in person with international colleagues, therefore, you don’t get a chance to discuss long-term ideas, plans, problems over a meal and a beer.
I am still positive about online conferences, but perhaps not as enthusiastic as I was in a BU Research Blog in April last year! In this blog I pointed out that Donald Nicolson in his book Academic Conferences as Neoliberal Commodities raised the question about return of investment of a conference [1-2] not just for the conference organisers (and funders) but also for individual academics. Internet-based conferences are cheaper than face-to-face conferences although often not free, two of my three international conferences had a registration fee, moreover there is the opportunity cost for the academic in attending a conference, especially if one does not receive the traditional benefits of meeting like-minded people in person.
Some thought for Sunday morning.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
CMMPH
References:
Congratulations to Mrs. Sulochana Dhakal Rai on the publication today of her PhD article ‘Classification of Caesarean Section: A Scoping Review of the Robson classification‘ in the Nepal Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology [1]. Sulochana’s PhD project in the Centre of Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH) is supervised by Dr. Pramod Regmi, Dr. Juliet Wood and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen at BU and she is supported in Nepal by Prof. Ganesh Dangal [Professor of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at Kathmandu Model Hospital] and senior obstetrician Dr. Keshar Bahadur Dhakal [Karnali Province Hospital, Nepal]. Sulochana has already published two earlier papers from her PhD thesis research [2-3].
References:
Congratulations to Sara Stride and her PhD supervisors on the publication of ‘Identifying the factors that influence midwives’ perineal practice at the time of birth in the United Kingdom’ in the international journal Midwifery [1]. The Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injuries (OASI) Care Bundle is designed to reduce the incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries. However, introducing behavioural change requires an understanding of current practice. This national study aims to establish midwives practice at the time of birth, and the factors that influence this. The paper concludes that there has been a growth in the number of midwives using “hands on” at the time of birth but midwives feel that they require additional training in regards to identifying an OASI. The study should be repeated following the roll out of the OASI care bundle, to identify its impact on midwives’ perineal practice. This nation-wide study identified the need for improvements in the recognition of OASI by midwives, and in future repeating the study would identify whether the OASI care bundle has influenced midwives’ practice.
Well done!
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
CMMPH
Reference
Congratulations to Debbie Almeida (in the Department of Midwifery & Health Sciences) who had another article published last month. This latest academic article “Dominant versus non-dominant hand during simulated infant CPR using the two-finger technique: a randomised study” appeared in Resuscitation Plus [1]. Debbie’s BU co-authors are Carol Clark, Ursula Rolfe and Jon Williams.
Reference:
Join Dr Karen Kirkham, Integrated Care System Clinical Lead, Dorset, to find out how Dorset is transforming the smartphone into a medical device at the next meeting of the Dorset ICS Innovation Hub Programme Group
This event takes place on Tuesday 29 June 1pm
For more information, please contact: sarah.chessell@uhd.nhs.uk
To join this event on Tuesday 29 June, please click here
Today Prof. Vanora Hundley, based in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences, gave a well-received presentation on ‘Changing the narrative around childbirth: whose responsibility is it?’ at the 32nd ICM (International Confederation of Midwives) Virtual Triennial Congress. Prof. Hundley presented online a BU collaboration published in the journal Evidence-based Midwifery [1]. This presentation is part of a larger body of interdisciplinary work between media and heatlh scholars at Bournemouth University [see 2-6].
The finding that UK midwives fear the media resonates with experiences from many other countries and professional groups. There is a need to change media discourse in fictional and factual representations of childbirth, and midwives have a critical role to play in this, but to do this they need to equip themselves with the skills necessary to engage with the media. Guidelines on responsible media reporting could ensure that media producers portray pregnancy, midwifery
and maternity care as naturally as possible.
This is a reminder that on Thursday 22nd July 2021 from 2-4pm, RDS will be hosting a virtual STEAMLab event under the strategic investment area (SIA) of Medical Science.
Please apply for a space by 5pm Monday 14th June. 
We ask all participants to download and complete the Application Form and return this to Lisa Andrews.
For more information, please see our previous blog post.
If you have any queries prior to submitting your application, please contact RDS Research Facilitators Lisa Andrews or Ehren Milner.
The national health ethics organisation in Nepal, the Nepal Health Research Council (NHRC), invited Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen to be part of its week long training programme next week. Edwin will be running a session on Focus Groups as qualitative on Bank Holiday Monday (31 May) and a session on Publishing Qualitative Research on Friday 4th June. As part of BU’s International Partnerships our staff help build research capacity in a number of low- and middle-income countries, such as Nepal.
The invitation came through Prof Madhusudan Subedi, one of his Nepali collaborators on a research project on ‘The impact of federalisation on Nepal’s health system: a longitudinal analysis’. The project, funded under the DFID/ESRC/MRC/Wellcome Health Systems Research Initiative, examines the consequences for the health system of Nepal’s move to a federal government structure. The PIs for the project, Dr. Simon Rushton and Dr. Julie Balan , are based at the University of Sheffield, further collaborators include: Prof. Padam Simkhada (BU Visiting Faculty) who is based at the University of Huddersfield, Dr. Pratik Adhikary (BU Visiting Faculty & BU PhD graduate) who is based at PHASE Nepal and Prof. Sujan Marahatta, who is based at Manmohan Memorial Institute of Health Sciences in Kathmandu (MMIHS). BU has a further collaboration with MMIHS as we currently have an Erasmus+ student & staff exchange.
BU staff can login below:
Academics write for newspaper in Nepal
New paper published on disability in women & girls
Global Consortium for Public Health Research 2025
World Drowning Prevention Day at BU
Contribute to the HE-BCI survey by sharing your involvement in BU’s social, community & cultural events
MSCA Postdoctoral Fellowships 2025 Call
ERC Advanced Grant 2025 Webinar MSCA Postdoctoral Fellowships 2025
Update on UKRO services
European research project exploring use of ‘virtual twins’ to better manage metabolic associated fatty liver disease
Research Information Network
Horizon Europe Work Programme 2025 Published
Horizon Europe 2025 Work Programme pre-Published