This week Professor Vanora Hundley in the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH) published a systematic review form with her international collaborators working on early labour. The paper is called ‘Diagnosing onset of labor: A systematic review of definitions in the research literature‘ and can be found it the Open Access journal BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth. 
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
- Hanley GE, Munro S, Greyson D, Gross MM, Hundley V, Spiby H and Janssen PA (2016) Diagnosing onset of labor: A systematic review of definitions in the research literature. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 16: 71 http://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12884-016-0857-4
The April issue of the Journal of Neonatal Nursing will publish the latest article written by a combination of Faculty of Health & Social Sciences staff and Visiting Faculty. The paper ‘Experiences of fathers with babies admitted to neonatal care units: A review of the literature’ offers a systematic narrative review on issues affecting fathers, whose babies are admitted to neonatal units.  The authors include Visiting Faculty Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust midwife Jillian Ireland and Prof. Minesh Khashu (consultant neonatologist) and FHSS staff Jaqui Hewitt-Taylor, Luisa Cescutti-Butler, and Edwin van Teijlingen. Twenty-seven papers in this interesting review highlighted four key themes: (1) stress & anxiety; (2) information (or lack thereof); (3) gender roles and (4) emotions. This paper adds to the growing literature (and understanding) of the role and place of men in maternity care generally and for fathers of babies in neonatal care in particular.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
- Ireland, J., Khashu, M., Cescutti-Butler, L., van Teijlingen, E., Hewitt-Taylor, J. (2016) Experiences of fathers with babies admitted to neonatal care units: A review of the literature, Journal of Neonatal Nursing [pre-published]
Doing a PhD may appeal to midwives and other NHS health professionals, but it often involves having to make difficult choices. Undertaking a part-time PhD means studying on top of a busy clinical position, but starting full-time study involves stepping away from practice, which may lead to a loss of clinical skills and confidence. The Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH) at Bournemouth University has come up with a novel solution making it easier for midwives to undertake a doctorate while still maintaining their clinical skills. This approach is highlighted in the latest publication by Dr. Susan Way and colleagues, describing a process where CMMPH collaborate with NHS partners to apply for a match-funded PhD.  The first partnership was with Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (PHT), with later partners expanded to cover the Isle of Wight and Southampton. Currently there are negotiations with Dorset Country Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. Non NHS organisations have also showed an interest with the Anglo European Chiropractic College (AECC) our likely next collaborator.
This jointly funded clinical academic doctorate allows midwives to combine clinical practice with a research role, working across BU and their NHS Trust. The studentships runs for four years and PhD students will spend two days per week working as a midwife in clinical practice and three days per week working on their thesis. This set up facilitates the co-creation of knowledge. Anybody interested in developing a joint clinical academic PhD with us please contact Dr. Susan Way (email@example.com), Prof. Vanora Hundley (firstname.lastname@example.org), or Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen (email@example.com) .
In addition to providing the individual midwives with excellent education, these studentships are designed to examine an area of clinical practice identified by the collaborating organisation where the evidence is lacking and research is needed. As a consequence the research studies will be directly relevant to practice and will have a demonstrable impact in the future. Hence BU will be able to show that its research and education have a direct benefit to the wider society. Moreover, the studentships currently benefit midwifery practice by building a critical mass of research-focus practitioners, who will translate research findings into practice and so create a culture of evidence-based practice. At BU the model has also been adopted by other professional groups such as nursing, physiotherapy and occupational therapy (OT).
The result is a clinical academic doctoral studentship is probably the best practical example of BU’s concept of FUSION, since it truly fuses research, education and practice.
Susan Way, Vanora Hundley & Edwin van Teijlingen.
- Way. S., Hundley, V., van Teijlingen, E., Walton, G., Westwood, G. (2016). Dr Know. Midwives (Spring Issue): 66-67.
The forthcoming editorial in Midwifery (Elsevier) by FHSS’s Dr Susan Way highlights the importance of midwifery education and its educators. This editorial makes reference to the recent series on midwifery in The Lancet. Of course, midwifery plays a vital role in improving the quality of care of women and infants globally. Dr. Way reminds us that consistent, high-quality midwifery care has a vital role to play in the reduction of maternal and newborn mortality. Outcomes are enhanced when care is led by midwives who are educated, licensed, regulated, integrated in the health system, and working in interdisciplinary teams, with ready access to specialised care when needed.
Midwifery one of the leading academic journals globally in the field of midwifery and maternity care. Dr.Way is based in the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health in FHSS at the Lansdowne Campus.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
- Way, S. (2015) Consistent, quality midwifery care: How midwifery education and the role of the midwife teacher are important contributions to the Lancet Series, Midwifery (online first) see: http://www.midwiferyjournal.com/article/S0266-6138(16)00021-8/abstract
- Renfrew, M.J., McFadden, A., Bastos, M.H. et al. (2014) Midwifery and quality care: findings from a new evidence-informed framework for maternal and newborn care. the Lancet. 384:1129–1145.
On Wednesday Jan. 27th CMMPH PhD student Preeti Mahato will present her PhD research ideas under the title “Addressing quality of care and equity of services available at birthing centres to improve maternal and neonatal health in western Nepal.” Her presentation will be held at the Lansdowne Campus at 13.00 in room 301 in Royal London House.
Preeti’s research focuses on birthing centres in western Nepal; and quality and equity of service available at these facilities. In Nepal, birthing centres act as first contact point for the women seeking maternity services especially the basic obstetric care. The focus of this presentation will be to talk about the first review article Preeti Mahato wrote for the ‘Journal of Asian Midwives’ entitled “Birthing centres in Nepal: Recent development, obstacles and opportunities”. The article has been accepted for publication in June 2016 and focuses on introducing birthing centres, their current state of operation under the health system of Nepal, barriers they are facing and what could be done to improve their present state. The quality of care issue available at birthing centre is emphasised, since the number of these facilities are increasing however there is a growing trend to bypass and uptake services at hospitals. Despite barriers to utilisation of services at birthing centres, they can play an important role in increasing institutional delivery rate and proportion of births benefiting from a skilled birth attendant.
The second part of presentation will provide a brief summary on what Preeti has done since writing a review article, as she has worked on a systematic review on quality of basic obstetric care facilities in low and middle income countries.
Preeti Mahato has worked in the field of public health in Nepal for three years after completing her Master of Public Health. She has an interest in sexual and reproductive health, women’s health and maternal and child health. Working as a public health officer she was involved in maternal and neonatal health that developed her interest in pursuing a doctorate related to maternal and neonatal health. Part of her work in Nepal also included monitoring and supervision of birthing centres in rural areas of Nepal and that is how she became motivated to start a PhD at BU.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
On Friday January 22nd 2016 FHSS Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen delivered a keynote address at the Annual Research Conference of the Dutch Midwifery Schools. The Dutch name for the event is ‘conferentie kennispoort’, in English ‘conference knowledge portal’ OR in a slightly different translation ‘conference knowledge gate’. The presentation aimed to get midwives, maternity care researchers and midwifery students and others in the audience to think differently about the world in which they work / practise. Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen used notions of a social versus a medical model in his talk. These are based on a number of sociology and midwifery publications of this concept over the past decade.[1-4]
Sociologists recognise two different approaches or philosophies as first a social model and, secondly, a medical model of childbirth. The social model stresses that childbirth is a physiological event that takes place in most women’s lives. The medical model highlights that childbirth is potentially pathological (or risky). In the latter view every pregnant woman is potentially at risk, hence she should deliver her baby in an obstetric hospital with its high-technology screening equipment supervised by obstetricians, the experts when something goes seriously wrong in childbirth. In other words, pregnancy and childbirth are only safe in retrospect.
- Bryers, HM, van Teijlingen E (2010) Risk, Theory, Social & Medical Models: a critical analysis of the concept of risk in maternity care, Midwifery 26: 488-96.
- Ireland, J., van Teijlingen, E. (2013) Normal birth: social-medical model, The Practising Midwife 16 (11): 17-20.
- van Teijlingen E (2005) Models of pregnancy and childbirth: A sociological analysis of the medical model, Sociol Res Online 10 (2) www.socresonline.org.uk/10/2/teijlingen.html
- van Teijlingen E (2015) Sociology of Midwifery. In: Sociology for Midwives Deery R, et al. (eds.) Cambridge: Polity Press, 22-37.
Congratulations to Joyce Miller, Monica Beharie and Elisabeth Simmenes based at the Anglo-European College of Chiropractic (AECC) and FHSS’s Alison Taylor and Sue Way who just had their paper ‘Parent reports of exclusive breastfeeding after attending a combined midwifery and chiropractic feeding clinic in the UK: A cross sectional service evaluation’ accepted in the journal Journal of Evidence-Based Complementary & Alternative Medicine.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
FHSS PhD student Rachel Arnold has been quoted in of one world’s most famous newspapers The New York Times. Late last week on Dec. 4th The New York Times published an article under the heading ‘Reported Gains in Afghan Maternal Health Are Found to Be Implausible’ . Rachel Arnold was interviewed since her PhD study, based in CMMPH, focuses on maternity care in one of the larger hospitals in the Afghan capital Kabul. Rachel has also published an excellent paper from her research in Afghanistan in the scientific journal BJOG . Her paper analyses the culture of a Kabul maternity hospital to understand its impact on the care of perinatal women and their babies. The paper is published in Gold Open Access, hence freely available to audiences across the globe,
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health
- Nordland. R. ‘Reported Gains in Afghan Maternal Health Are Found to Be Implausible’ The New York Times Dec 4th, 2015, see: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/world/asia/afghanistan-maternal-mortality-rate.html
- Arnold R, van Teijlingen E, Ryan K, Holloway I. Understanding Afghan health care providers; a qualitative study of the culture of care in a Kabul maternity hospital. BJOG 2015: 122(2): 260–267.
Student midwives spend approximately 50% of their three year undergraduate programme in the clinical area. Going to a new placement is often a stressful time for them as they consider ‘will they fit in’, ‘will they know enough’, ‘have they the right skills’, ‘what will they be able to learn whilst there to meet their practice assessments’ and so on. Other concerns relate to being away from home, what hours they are expected to do and how they cope with ‘difficult’ mentors. If students are unfamiliar with healthcare environments it takes time for them to adjust and become used to the environment. It was these thoughts that began fermenting in my head back in 2010 and following a positive response from students whose views on a book on placements were informally sought, I pitched the idea to a commissioning editor at Wiley Blackwell. In addition wider research had revealed that no such book existed within the published midwifery arena. Finally, in 2012 a contract was agreed between myself, and Margaret Fisher, Associate Professor in Midwifery at Plymouth University to co-edit nine chapters for submission in November 2014. The book is now due for publication on the 11th December 2015.
Professor Paul Lewis wrote the forward and chapter contributions from Bournemouth University lecturers, Dr. Sue Way, Stella Rawnson and myself, prepare prospective and current students for midwifery practice and the profession, caseloading and the elective period. Jo Coggins and Henrietta Otley, both midwives practising in North Wiltshire were co-opted to write chapters on ‘Preparing for practice’ and ‘Low-risk midwifery placements’. Other chapters were written by Margaret Fisher and Faye Doris at Plymouth University.
The final published edition is small enough to fit into a uniform pocket and contains many vignettes from students currently or previously studying at Bournemouth and Plymouth University. Their stories reflect ‘real life’ clinical experience and ‘Top Tips’ provide overall advice. Three original cartoons illustrating the vagaries of placement were devised by Clare Shirley (formerly a BU student, now a newly qualified midwife) and Hugo Beaumont (4th year medical student at Plymouth University). Students and women have provided photographs. Both Margaret and I hope students far and wide will enjoy the book which aims to provide a realistic perspective on clinical placement, by offering hints and tips and encouragement along their student journey.
This month’s Café Scientific last week (Nov. 3rd) was run as a collaboration between CMMPH and the Media School. Café Scientific is a monthly event hosted at Café Boscanova for Bournemouth University.
This month’s debate was chaired by CMMPH’s Prof. Vanora Hundley (sitting in the centre of the photo taken by Naomi Kay). The debaters on either side were Dr. Ann Luce and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen. Ann Luce is a well recognised media researcher and a Senior Lecturer in Journalism and Communication who argued against the motion “Fear in childbirth: is the media responsible?” Two opposing presentations generated a lively debate. The audience, however, was not with Ann and overwhelmingly voted in favour of the motion.
The next session of Café Scientific also has a health flavour as James Gavin will be talking on Tuesday December 1st on: Upwardly mobile: Why stair climbing helps us stay active.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Ms. Sheetal Sharma, PhD student in FHSS, published her latest paper in Midwifery (Elsevier) this week. This latest paper ‘Midwifery2030, a woman’s Pathway to health: What does it mean?’ is co-authored by a number of illustious midwifery researchers. The 2014 State of the World’s Midwifery report included a new framework for the provision of womancentred sexual, reproductive, maternal, newborn and adolescent health care, known as the Midwifery2030 Pathway. The Pathway was designed to apply in all settings (high-, middle- and low income countries, and in any type of health system). This paper describes the process of developing the Midwifery2030 Pathway and explain the meaning of its different components, with a view to assisting countries with its implementation.
Sheetal is currently in her final year of a PhD on the evaluation of the impact of a maternity care intervention in Nepal.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen, Dr. Catherine Angell & Prof. Vanora Hundley (all CMMPH)
Visiting Faculty Prof. Padam Simkhada (based at Liverpool John Moores University).
ten Hoope-Bender, P. Lopes, S., Nove, A., Michel-Schuldt, M., Moyo, NT, Bokosi, M., Codjia, L., Sharma, S., Homer, CSE. (2015) Midwifery2013, a woman’s Pathway to health: What does it mean? Midwifery
This week saw publication of a new CMMPH paper in BMC Health Services Research. This methodological paper ‘Assessing the performance of maternity care in Europe: a critical exploration of tools and indicators‘ is a collaboration between several European maternity-care researchers based in Spain (Ramón Escuriet, Fatima Leon-Larios), Belgium (Katrien Beeckman), Northern Ireland (Marlene Sinclair), the UK (Lucy Firth, Edwin van Teijlingen), Switzerland ( Christine Loytved, Ans Luyben) and Portugal (Joanna White). Dr. Ans Luyben is also Visiting Faculty in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences at Bournemouth University. The underlying work was supported by the European Union through a COST Action called Childbirth Cultures, Concerns, and Consequences headed by Prof. Soo Downe at the University of Central Lancashire. COST is seen by the EU as an important tool in building and supporting the European Research Area (ERA).
This paper critically reviews published tools and indicators currently used to measure maternity care performance within Europe, focusing particularly on whether and how current approaches enable systematic appraisal of processes of minimal (or non-) intervention in support of physiological or “normal birth”.
The authors conclude: “The review identified an emphasis on technical aspects of maternity, particularly intrapartum care in Europe, rather than a consideration of the systematic or comprehensive measurement of care processes contributing to non-intervention and physiological (normal) birth. It was also found that the links between care processes and outcomes related to a normal mode of birth are not being measured.”
Professor Edwin van Teijlingen
The media are often blamed for influencing society’s attitudes and views. In this month’s Café Scientific we will debate the impact of the mass media on women’s views of childbirth. The motion is: “Fear in childbirth: is the media responsible?”
Café Scientific is being hosted at Café Boscanova in Bournemouth on November 3rd at 19.30. The debate is open to the general public. It will be chaired by Prof. Vanora Hundley, Professor of Midwifery and the two proponents on either side of the debate are Dr. Ann Luce and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen. Ann Luce is a well recognised media researcher and a Senior Lecturer in Journalism and Communication. Edwin van Teijlingen is a medical sociologist and Professor of Reproductive Health Research.
The debate will touch upon social perceptions and beliefs about childbirth can increase women’s requests for interventions, such as caesarean section, with long-term health implications for mothers and babies. This month’s Café Scientific will explore the role of the mass media in shaping these beliefs and identify whether media portrayals are responsible for rising rates of intervention.
Join us for an interactive debate on the impact of the mass media on women’s views of childbirth. The audience will be given the opportunity to vote on the motion before and after the debate.
These academics have written a paper on the topic of debate, a copy of which can be found here!
Professor Edwin van Teijlingen (CMMPH) has been invited to present a key note speech at the Kennispoort Verloskunde conference in Utrecht, the Netherlands in January 2016. He will be speaking about ‘Dealing with risk in maternity care: the social versus medical model’. The presentation is based on a number of publications around the sociological topic of the medical/social model of childbirth. [1-3]
One of the ways sociologists analyse health and health care is in terms of a ‘medical’ versus a ‘social’ model, or in this field, a midwifery model. As pregnancy and birth are biological and physiological events which are very much embedded in a social and cultural setting, these are good examples to highlight the use and misuse of the medical and social model. Modern Western society has a slightly paradoxical view of pregnancy. On the one hand, the average woman in childbirth is not ill because pregnancy is not an illness. On the other hand, pregnant women are deemed to need a lot of health care throughout pregnancy and childbirth. Making the distinction between a medical and a social model of a social phenomenon is not exclusive to midwifery. Over the past decades researchers have pointed to the existence of a medical and social model in alcohol misuse, obesity, sex, eating disorders, infertility treatment, to name but a few phenomena.
- van Teijlingen, E. (2005) A critical analysis of the medical model as used in the study of pregnancy and childbirth, Sociological Research Online, 10 (2) Web address: http://www.socresonline.org.uk/10/2/teijlingen.html.
- MacKenzie Bryers H., van Teijlingen, E. (2010) Risk, Theory, Social & Medical Models: critical analysis of the concept of risk in maternity care, Midwifery 26(5): 488-496.
- van Teijlingen, E. (2015) Sociology of Midwifery. In: Sociology for Midwives Deery, R., Denny, E. & Letherby, G. (eds.) Cambridge: Polity Press, 22-37.
The current issue of the Nepal Journal of Epidemiology published today carries an editorial by a BU-led team of researchers and development workers. The editorial Mental health issues in pregnant women in Nepal highlights the intervention funded by THET which aims to improve the knowledge and attitude of maternity care workers in a rural district in the south of Nepal. The BU authors include Visiting Faculty: Padam Simkhada, Samridhi Pradham, Jillian Ireland and Bibha Simkhada, the other co-authors are affiliated with the charity we work with in Nepal (Ram Chandra Silwal), the Buddhist charity based in London Green Tara Trust (Padmadharini Fanning), and our Tribhuvan University based colleagues (Lokendra Sherchan, Shyam K Maharjan, and Ram K Maharjan.
This THET-funded project will involve over 15 UK short-term volunteers. It is important to bring UK volunteers, who as health professionals will bring their experience of, and training in, the provision of mental health and maternity/midwifery services including the area of mental ill health prevention and health promotion. These experienced health workers (such as midwives, family doctors, mental health nurses, health visitors, psychiatrists) from the UK are invited to volunteer for two to three weeks at a time to design and deliver training. The mixture of training staff abroad (= Education) by UK professionals (=Practice) through an intervention which is properly evaluated (=Research) is a perfect example of BU’s FUSION in action.
This project is supported by the Tropical Health & Education Trust (THET) as part of the Health Partnership Scheme, which is funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and runs from this year May 1st until the autumn of 2016. The paper is freely available on line, click here!
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
van Teijlingen E, Simkhada P, Devkota B, Fanning P, Ireland J, Simkhada B, Sherchan L, Silwal CR, Pradhan S, Maharjan KS, Maharjan KS. Mental health issues in pregnant women in Nepal. Nepal J Epidemiol. 2015;5(3); 499-501.
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) summit is being held today in New York. As part of this summit the pope will address the United Nations in NY as will Bill and Melinda Gates who run the largest private philantropic organisation in the world. The key underlying principles of the SDGs are: (a) reducing (or eradicating) poverty eradication; (b) changing unsustainable and promoting sustainable patterns of consumption and production; and (c) protecting and managing the natural resource base of economic and social development. The seventeen SDGs are outlined in Table 1.
Table 1 Sustainable Development Goals
|End poverty in all its forms everywhere
|End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
|Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
|Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
|Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
|Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
|Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
|Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
|Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation
|Reduce inequality within and among countries
|Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
|Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
|Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts*
|Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
|Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
|Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
|Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development
The SDGs replace the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) formally from today onwards. Key questions to be asked by researchers (and policy makers) include: (a) how are these SDGs different from the MDGs in their effect on international development?; (b) How successful will the SDGs be?, including the question: What do we define as success?; and (c) How useful were the MDGs, in which countries and for whom? These are ‘big’ system level questions, for those of use working in the field of maternity care more specific questions to address would be around priority settting. As reducing maternal mortality was one of the eight MDGs, i.e. recognised as an individual goal or target, but in the SDGs maternal health will fall under the overarching heading of Goals 3 ‘Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages’. As health is only one of 17 SDGs and maternal health fits in with all other aspects of the lifespan does this mean maternal health has become less of a priority? Of course only time and plenty of good research will tell.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
BU academics Ms. Lesley Milne, Prof. Vanora Hundley and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen in collaboration with BU Visiting Faculty Prof. Padam Simkhada (Liverpool John Moores University) and Ms. Jillian Ireland (Community midwife NHS Poole) published there latest paper yesterday in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. The paper ‘Staff perspectives of barriers to women accessing birthing services in Nepal: a qualitative study’ originated from research conducted in small maternity hospitals in Nepal.
The project was funded in 2013 through the first ever WellBeing of Women-Royal College of Midwives International Fellowship Award. This Fellowship was the first of its kind. It was established to enable midwives to further develop research interests in midwifery, maternity services, pregnancy, childbirth and women’s health from an international perspective.
The Scholarship competition was open to RCM midwives undertaking research in the UK or abroad which would address Millennium Development Goals 4 (Reduce Child Mortality) and 5 (Improve Maternal Health). Lesley Milne in the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Heealth (CMMPH) was the first and very worthy recipient of this award.
Based on the fieldwork we published our paper in BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth an Open Access journal. The paper highlights that Nepal has made significant progress with regard to reducing the maternal mortality ratio but a major challenge remains the under-utilisation of skilled birth attendants. We found other studies had explored women’s views of the barriers to facility birth; however the voices of staff who offer services have not been studied in detail. This research explored the views of staff as to the key reasons why pregnant women do not give birth in a maternity-care facility when they exist.
This study highlights a multitude of barriers, not all of the same importance or occuring at the same time in the pregnancy journey. It is clear that staff are aware of many of the barriers for women in reaching the facility to give birth, and these fit with previous literature of women’s views. However, staff had limited insight into barriers occuring within the facility itself and were more likely to suggest that this was a problem for other institutions and not theirs.
Edwin van Teijlingen, Lesley Milne & Vanora Hundley
@EvanTeijlingen / @VanoraHundley
Lesley Milne, Edwin van Teijlingen, Vanora Hundley, Padam Simkhada and Jillian Ireland, Staff perspectives of barriers to women accessing birthing services in Nepal: a qualitative study, BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth 2015, 15:142 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2393/15/142
Dr. Jenny Hall and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen are holding a lunchtime at today’s (Friday 3rd July 2015) BU Midwifery Education Conference (#MidEd15) in Business School. The one-hour session is advertised under the title ‘Believe you can write!’ Both BU academics are editors and on editorial boards of several prestigious health journals across the globe.
Over the past few years CMMPH staff have written and published several articles on academic writing and publishing. Some of these papers have been co-authored by BU Visiting Faculty, Dr. Bri jesh Sathian (Nepal), Dr. Emma Pitchforth (RAND, Cambridge), Ms. Jillian Ireland (NHS Poole) and/or Prof. Padam Simkhada (Liverpool John Moores University).
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen & Dr. Jenny Hall
Twitter accounts: @HallMum5 / @EvanTeijlingen