Tagged / Health

Clinical Governance RKEDF sessions

NHS, Research Ethics, Training

As part of the RKEDF Academics and Researchers can book onto the following sessions, either as a one-to-one meeting or a bespoke team session:

Please contact Suzy Wignall, Clinical Governance Advisor if you are interested in any of these sessions.

Two new COVID-19 papers in FHSS

international, Publishing, writing

Today FHSS Prof. Jonathan Parker published an article (online first) on structural discrimination and abuse associated with COVID-19 in care homes in The Journal of Adult Protection [1].  Whilst Dr. Preeti Mahato, Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen and FHSS Visiting Professor Padam Simkhada had a COVID-19 paper published in the Journal of Midwifery Association of Nepal (JMAN) in late-January 2021 [2], although an electronic copy only reached their email inbox today.

 

  1. Parker, J. (2021) Structural discrimination and abuse: COVID-19 and people in care homes in England and Wales, The Journal of Adult Protection, Online ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAP-12-2020-0050
  2. Tamang, P., Mahato, P., Simkhada P., Bissell, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2021) Pregnancy, Childbirth, Breastfeeding and Coronavirus Disease: What is known so far? Journal of Midwifery Association of Nepal (JMAN) 2(1): 96-101.

Funding Development Briefing – Spotlight on: NIHR

Funding opportunities

The RDS Funding Development Briefings now occur weekly, on a Wednesday at 12 noon.

Each session covers the latest major funding opportunities, followed by a brief Q&A session. Some sessions also include a spotlight on a particular funding opportunity of strategic importance to BU.

Next Wednesday 10th March, there will be a spotlight on NIHR. 

We will cover:

  • Aims and scope of NIHR
  • Overview of NIHR funding programmes
  • Q & A

Please note this will be a brief overview of NIHR, with more detailed NIHR sessions planned for later in the year.  Support for NIHR applications is available to Bournemouth University staff and people working locally in the NHS through BUCRU, and depending on the support you require, is mostly free of charge. There are no general restrictions on topic area or professional background of the researcher. To discuss your NIHR research please get in touch through bucru@bournemouth.ac.uk.

For those unable to attend, the session will be recorded and shared on the Teams site under the ‘Files’ section, and also saved on the I Drive at I:\RDS\Public\Funding Pipeline\Funding Development Briefings.

Please email RKEDF@bournemouth.ac.uk to receive the Teams invite for these sessions.

NIHR issues final update on implementation of the Restart Framework

Guidance, NHS, Research Ethics

The NIHR published a Framework on 21 May 2020 – when the NHS started to restore routine clinical services – to support the restarting of research paused due to COVID-19. Developed in partnership with multiple stakeholders and the devolved nations, the Framework provides a flexible structure for local decision-making.

You can read the latest and final update here.

Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) – survey open

NHS, Research Ethics

IRAS, the Integrated Research Application System, is changing.

The Health Research Authority wants to hear from people who’ve used the system about how it should look in the future.

A short anonymous survey https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/5B5X95H is available until 24th February 2021.

New BU reproductive health paper

international, open access, PG research, Publishing, student research, writing

Congratulations to Dr. Pramod Regmi (Lecturer in International Health) in the Department of Nursing Sciences on today’s publication of ‘The unmet needs for modern family planning methods among postpartum women in Sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review of the literature’ [1].  The paper in the international peer-reviewed journal Reproductive Health is co-produced with BU MSc Public Health graduate Jumaine Gahungu and Dr. Mariam Vahdaninia who left the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences in mid-2020. 

Well done.

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

 

Reference:

  1. Gahungu, J., Vahdaninia, M. & Regmi, P. (2021) The unmet needs for modern family planning methods among postpartum women in Sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review of the literature. Reprod Health 18, 35   https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-021-01089-9

Call for Papers: Digital Narrative and Interactive Storytelling for Public Engagement with Health and Science

Publishing

Guest Editors: R. Lyle Skains and An Nguyen, Dept. of Communications & Journalism, Bournemouth University

Register your interest and submit abstracts at https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/17893

Keywords: digital narrative, interactive storytelling, health communication, science communication, science education, science journalism

We are seeking papers for a joint issue with Frontiers in Communication (Science and Environmental Communication; Health Communication) and Frontiers in Environmental Science (Science and Environmental Communication) on digital and interactive narratives and science and health education and journalism. This Special Topic aims to investigate how digital media affordances—such as human-machine and human-human interactivity, multimedia capacities, dynamic visual appeal, playfulness, personalization, real-time immersion, multilinear narrative, and so on—have been and can be used to effectively communicate health and science issues. We would like to go beyond the current discourse on fake news, mis/disinformation and online radicalization, which recognizes the malignant effects of digital media on health and science affairs, to refocus on the positive affordances of digital media—both in direct education (e.g., museums, public demonstrations, school settings) and through the media (e.g., news, film, games)—as communication tools and techniques for health and science topics.

The aim of this Research Topic is, therefore, to explore the current state of play, as well as potential future trajectories, of digital narrative and storytelling in the communication of health and science topics. We invite scholarly investigations, including theoretically driven and practice-related research, on any topic relevant to that overall goal. Some potential topics include, but are not limited to:

  • How can science and health be effectively communicated through both playful and informative digital narrative and storytelling forms?
  • How can information, education and entertainment be integrated into digital narratives about health and science issues?
  • How do the socio-technical affordances of digital health and science narrative and storytelling, especially interactivity, affect audience experience, message cohesion, knowledge acquisition, emotional engagement and, ultimately, health/science literacy?
  • Can digital narrative and storytelling serve as an antidote to digital health and science mis/disinformation and online science denial more broadly, and in what way?
  • How are interactive narratives currently used for health & science communication and what are the social, economic and technological constraints on their production?

Types of Manuscripts:
● Empirical Research Papers
● Practice-led research Projects
● Reviews
● Conceptual Analysis
● Brief Research Reports
● Perspectives/Commentaries

Details on manuscript types: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/communication#article-types

Abstract Deadline: 31 March 2021

Full Papers: 30 Sept 2021

The full call is at https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/17893; please register interest using the “Participate” button, and contact Lyle Skains (lskains@bournemouth.ac.uk) with any questions.

New publication Dr. Orlanda Harvey

PG research, Publishing, student research, Women's Academic Network, writing

Congratulations to Social Work Lecturer Dr. Orlanda Harvey on the acceptance of a paper by the journal Drugs: Education, Prevention & Policy. This latest academic paper ‘Libido as a motivator for starting and restarting non-prescribed anabolic androgenic steroid use among men: a mixed-methods study’ [1] is based on her Ph.D. research.  Previous papers associated with her thesis covered aspects of non-prescribed anabolic androgenic steroid use [2-3] as well as her wider Ph.D. journey [4].

 

References:

    1. Harvey, O., Parrish, M., van Teijlingen, E, Trenoweth, S. (2021) Libido as a reason to use non-prescribed Anabolic Androgenic Steroids, Drugs: Education, Prevention & Policy (accepted).
    2. Harvey, O., Keen, S., Parrish, M., van Teijlingen, E. (2019) Support for people who use Anabolic Androgenic Steroids: A Systematic Literature Review into what they want and what they access. BMC Public Health 19: 1024 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7288-x https://rdcu.be/bMFon
    3. Harvey, O., Parrish, M., van Teijlingen, E., Trenoweth, S. (2020) Support for non-prescribed Anabolic Androgenic Steroids users: A qualitative exploration of their needs Drugs: Education, Prevention & Policy 27:5, 377-386. doi 10.1080/09687637.2019.1705763
    4. Spacey, A., Harvey, O., Casey, C. (2020) Postgraduate researchers’ experiences of accessing participants via gatekeepers: ‘wading through treacle!’  Journal of Further and Higher Education 2: 1-18.

 

Department of Health and Social Care statement on prioritisation of research studies

NHS, Research Ethics

Please find below a statement from the Department of Health & Social Care. Please bear this in mind when in correspondence with NHS Trusts and if planning a clinical research study.
If you have any queries, please contact Suzy Wignall, Clinical Governance Advisor, in the first instance.

Statement from DHSC 

We recognise that at the current time those working in many NHS sites are under huge pressure as the number of COVID-19 cases and admissions to hospitals continue to rise and frontline clinical staff are unable to work due to sickness.

While we have a small number of proven treatments and vaccines for COVID-19, more are needed to reduce transmission, reduce the number of patients that require hospitalisation and to improve outcomes for those that do. It is therefore critical that at this challenging time we continue to recruit participants to our urgent public health (UPH) studies. As such I am writing to confirm that the current levels of prioritisation for research studies, set out within the Restart Framework still apply, as follows:

  • Level 1a (Top Priority) – COVID-19 UPH vaccine and prophylactic studies (as prioritised by the Vaccines Task Force and agreed by Jonathan Van-Tam, deputy CMO) and platform therapeutics trials (currently RECOVERY/RECOVERY +; PRINCIPLE; REMAP CAP).
  • Level 1b – Other COVID-19 UPH studies
  • Level 2 – Studies where the research protocol includes an urgent treatment or intervention without which patients could come to harm. These might be studies that provide access to potentially life preserving or life-extending treatment not otherwise available to the patient.
  • Level 3 – All other studies (including COVID-19 studies not in Level 1a or 1b).

I would also like to take this opportunity to remind you of the NIHR guidance for a second wave of covid 19 activity (https://www.nihr.ac.uk/documents/nihr-guidance-for-a-second-wave-of-covid-19-activity/25837).This guidance still applies and, as outlined, states that the deployment of staff funded through an NIHR Infrastructure award or funded by the NIHR Clinical Research Network (CRN) to front line duties should only occur in exceptional circumstances.

The deployment of clinical academic staff should be undertaken within the guidelines issued by a working group convened by the UK Clinical Academic Training Forum and the Conference of Postgraduate Medical  Deans of the UK. Where NHS Trusts consider they need to redeploy staff to support the frontline this should only be done to support clinical activity during the emergency phase of the pandemic and we would expect them to return to their R&D roles as soon as possible, once the pressures on the system reduce.

As indicated by the Restart Framework, at the current time, we need to continue prioritise our support for the most urgent COVID-19 research as part of the response to tackle the pandemic. At the same time we need to ensure we continue to try and maintain support to deliver non-COVID studies currently open on the portfolio, particularly those within Level 2. A system-wide Recovery, Resilience and Growth programme has been established which brings together the key partners across the clinical research ecosystem to ensure the UK is well-positioned to take a coordinated national approach to achieving the recovery of the UK’s clinical research delivery and restore a full, diverse and active research portfolio as soon as practicable.

COVID-19 in Qatar

international, open access, Publishing, writing

Peer reviewing is the backbone of academic publishing. It is this peer review process to ensure that papers/publications have been vetted scientifically prior to publication by experts in the field, i.e. one’s peers. However, the process is not without its problems. One such problems is the delay in academic publishing. For example, a few days ago we published a substantive editorial on COVID-19 in Qater [1].  When we submitted this in July 2020 the information in our editorial was very up to date, and it still was when the Qatar Medical Journal accepted it on 26th July 2020.  Unfortunately, with all the incredibly rapid developments in vaccine development, approval and roll out some of the paper now reads like ‘historial data’.

 

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH)

 

Reference:

  1. van Teijlingen, E.R., Sathian, B., Simkhada, P., Banerjee, I. (2021) COVID-19 in Qatar: Ways forward in public health & treatment, Qatar Medical Journal 2020(38): 1-8 https://doi.org/10.5339/qmj.2020.38

Science/Health/Arts/Comms Interdisciplinary Projects: Collaboration Opportunity

Fusion

logo - science, health, and data communications research groupThe Science, Health, and Data Communications Research Group will be conducting a series of workshops to start off the new year, designed to help Bournemouth researchers form new networks and collaborative projects around educating and communicating research to the public.

This series will take place from Monday 18 January 2021 to Friday 22 January 2021, each day from 1-3pm, online, and open to any and all researchers across the university. See full details and register on EventBrite.

This “crucible” programme, based on NESTA’s highly successful Crucible-in-a-Box, will focus on activities designed to connect researchers based on mutual interests, and develop those interests into new directions for collaborative research. It will also include interactive sessions on communicating your research to the media, collecting data for impact studies, working in interdisciplinary teams, and communications strategies.

If you are unable to participate in these sessions, we will likely be running them again. Full details are available on the EventBrite link; questions and requests to be notified of future events can be directed to Lyle Skains (lskains@bournemouth.ac.uk).

First BU paper accepted for 2021

NHS, open access, Publishing, writing

Congratulations to Prof. Vanora Hundley whose article ‘Escalation triggers and expected responses in obstetric early warning systems used in UK consultant-led maternity units’ is now available Open Access online. The paper has been accepted in Resuscitation Plus. Co-authors include FHSS Visiting Faculty Prof. Gary Smith and Dr. Richard Isaacs.

The paper reports on a review of OEWS [Obstetric Early Warning Systems] charts and escalation policies across consultant-led maternity units in the UK (n = 147). OEWS charts were analysed for variation in the values of physiological parameters triggering different levels of clinical escalation. The observed variations in the trigger thresholds used in OEWS charts and the quality of information included within the accompanying escalation protocols is likely to lead to suboptimal detection and response to clinical deterioration during pregnancy and the post-partum period. The paper concludes the development of a national OEWS and escalation protocol would help to standardise care across obstetric units.

 

Congratulations!

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

CMMPH

Midwifery and the Media

international, NHS, Publishing, writing

Today we received an end-of-year good-news message from ResearchGate telling us that 700 people had ‘read’ our book Midwifery, Childbirth and the Media [1].  Lee Wright, Senior Lecturer in the School of Nursing and Midwifery at Birmingham City University wrote in his review of our edited volume: “…our media image and digital foot print are rapidly becoming the most important window into our profession. In a rapidly changing environment this book provides an up to date and informative insight into how our profession is affected by the media and how our profession can inform and influence the image of midwifery. This area is going to become even more important in the future universities and trusts increasingly use broadcast and social media to manage information and inform our clients of the services we provide.  This book will be the important first text in a new growth area. It brings together an internationally recognised group of authors who are experts in this field. I wholeheartedly recommend it to you.”

This edited collection was published by Palgrave Macmillan in 2017 and it is part of a larger body of Bournemouth University research on the topic [2-6].

 

Professor Edwin van Teijlingen, Professor Vanora Hundley and Associate Professor Ann Luce

 

References:

  1. Luce, A., Hundley, V., van Teijlingen, E. (Eds.) (2017) Midwifery, Childbirth and the Media, London: Palgrave Macmillan [ISBN: 978-3-319-63512-5].
  2. Luce, A., Cash, M., Hundley, V., Cheyne, H., van Teijlingen, E., Angell, C. (2016) “Is it realistic?” the portrayal of pregnancy and childbirth in the media BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth 16: 40 http://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12884-016-0827-x
  3. Angell, C. (2017) An Everyday Trauma: How the Media Portrays Infant Feeding, In: Luce, A. et al. (Eds.) Midwifery, Childbirth and the Media, London: Palgrave Macmillan pp: 45-59.
  4. Hundley, V., Luce, A., van Teijlingen, E., Edlund, S. (2019) Changing the narrative around childbirth: whose responsibility is it? Evidence-based Midwifery 17(2): 47-52.
  5. Hundley, V., Duff, E., Dewberry, J., Luce, A., van Teijlingen, E. (2014) Fear in childbirth: are the media responsible? MIDIRS Midwifery Digest 24(4): 444-447.
  6. Hundley, V., Luce, A., van Teijlingen, E. (2015) Do midwives need to be more media savvy? MIDIRS Midwifery Digest 25(1):5-10.