Tagged / publication

New Book Announcement: Protest Camps

Publishing

Protest Camps hits indie bookshops and digital shelves worldwide today. Co-authored by Bournemouth University’s Dr. Anna Feigenbaum, Fabian Frenzel (Leicester) and Patrick McCurdy (Ottawa), Protest Camps takes readers on a journey across different cultural, political and geographical landscapes of protest.

From Tahrir Square to Occupy, from the Red Shirts in Thailand to the Teachers in Oaxaca, Protest Camps covers over 50 different protest camps around the world over the past 50 years, offering a ground-breaking and detailed global investigation. Drawing on a wealth of original interview material, the authors argue that protest camps are unique spaces in which people enact new forms of democratic politics.

Protest Camps is now available at local booksellers and for online order  in the UK. To find out more on the broader Protest Camps Research Network visit protestcamps.org  and follow the project on twitter @protestcamps

 “Feigenbaum, Frenzel and McCurdy’s wonderful book brings a fresh perspective to our understanding of contemporary political action … A fine achievement.”

– Professor Nick Couldry, London School of Economics and Political Science

 “This book provides a captivating cartography that helps heal the chasm between how we live our everyday life and what our political ideas are, how we protest against the old world whilst proposing new ones.” 

 -John Jordan, co-founder of ‘Reclaim the Streets’ protest movement

To celebrate the launch of Protest Camps, the authors are participating in events across the UK and beyond:

October 19th – London Anarchist Bookfair, Queen Mary University of London
October 21st –The Organisation of the Organisationless – Talks in Digital Culture #1, King’s College London
October 26th – Edinburgh Independent Radical Book Fair 2013
October 29th –New Perspectives on Anarchism and Management, Centre for Philosophy and Political Economy at University of Leicester
October 30th –Protest Camps and Dissent PR Speaker Series at Bournemouth University
October 31st –Institute for Protest and Social Movement Studies at Technische Universitaet Berlin
November 2nd –ESRC Festival of Social Science event, Creating Worlds Together: A workshop on Experimentations and Protest Camps, Birkbeck, University of London
November 8th – tbc, Johannesburg, South Africa, Wits University
November 13th to 14th –PSA Media and Politics Group Conference, Bournemouth Univeristy
November 20th to 21st – Leicester, Generations of Protest Conference, DeMontford University

Publish empirical or experimental data early whilst letting theory mature?

PG research, Publishing, Research assessment, Research Ethics, Research Integritiy, Training

My colleagues and I have written several papers to help budding researchers about the process of writing and publishing academic papers (Hundley, & van Teijlingen 2002; van Teijlingen 2004; Pitchforth et al. 2005; van Teijlingen et al. 2012; Simkhada et al. 2013). For all researchers – students and staff alike publishing research findings is important as new insights will add to the existing knowledge base, advance the academic discipline and, in the case of applied research, perhaps improve something in the lives of others such as, well-being, the economy or the environment. Apart from this general/altruistic drive to add to knowledge, the advice academics give our postgraduate students is: to get your study published as soon as possible. The two main reasons for publishing early are: (a) getting into print to potentially help your careers; and (b) staking once claim as an authority in the field and/or publishing your findings before someone else does.
As always there are exceptions to the rule. As academics we agree that trying to get into print early is a good personal strategy for an early researcher or a postgraduate student especially for those working with empirical or experimental data. However, occasionally it is better to wait and give the underlying idea in the paper time to develop and mature. The kind of paper that often improves with time is one based on theory. Let me share a personal example: a theoretical paper from my PhD (awarded by the University of Aberdeen in 1994). This paper started life as a theory chapter in my PhD thesis (van Teijlingen 1994). This chapter on models of maternity care was not the strongest part of my thesis and it took me another decade of fine-tuning to get it into a state worth publishing. The paper ‘A Critical Analysis of the Medical Model as used in the Study of Pregnancy and Childbirth’ was finally published in Sociological Research Online, the original online-only Sociology journal in the world (van Teijlingen 2005). The wait was worthwhile as the paper is today (May 2013), eight year after publication, the seventh ‘most viewed articles during the past eight weeks’ in the journal (see: http://www.socresonline.org.uk/stats/top20.html).
In conclusion, it is generally sound advice to new researchers and postgraduate students to publish early. Occasionally though, waiting and giving your paper time to improve through discussion with colleagues, presenting the ideas at conferences and on blogs may lead to a better final product.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health
School of Health & Social Care

References
Hundley, V., van Teijlingen E. (2002) How to decide where to send an article for publication? Nursing Standard 16(36): 21.
van Teijlingen (1994) A social or medical comparison of childbirth? : comparing the arguments in Grampian (Scotland) and the Netherlands (PhD thesis), Aberdeen: University of Aberdeen. Available online in the British Library (search for: uk.bl.ethos.387237 ).
Teijlingen van, E. (2004) Why I can’t get any academic writing done, Medical Sociology News 30 (3): 62-6.
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) Freely available online at: www.socresonline.org.uk/10/2/teijlingen.html.
Pitchforth, E., Porter, M., Teijlingen van, E.R., Forrest Keenan, K. (2005) Writing up and presenting qualitative research in family planning and reproductive health care, Journal of Family Planning & Reproductive Health Care 31 (2): 132-135.
Teijlingen van, E., Simkhada. P.P., Simkhada, B., Ireland, J. (2012) The long and winding road to publication, Nepal Journal Epidemiology 2(4): 213-215. http://nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/article/view/7093
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

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU) Annual Report

At the Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU) we think it is important to review our activities on a regular basis, to document our achievements and to outline our plans for the future. We have decided that the best way to do this is to prepare an Annual Report. It was completed some months ago and now we would like to share it more widely with our colleagues in the University. It can be found on our microsite at http://microsites.bournemouth.ac.uk/bucru/news/ we hope it is of interest.

The support and collaborations we offer are available to staff within the University, and to staff in the NHS. In the next year we will be particularly trying to develop new collaborations between University and health service staff that will lead to high quality grant applications.

If you would like further information please contact Louise Ward (wardl@bournemouth.ac.uk Tel: 01202 961939)

http://microsites.bournemouth.ac.uk/bucru/ 

Proposed Copyright Hub to Streamline Copyright Licensing

Publishing, Research Integritiy

Recommendations for the establishment of a Digital Copyright Exchange, contained in a final report into its feasibility, have just been published following a Department of Business, Innovation and Skills funded study undertaken by Richard Hooper, click here.

Given the amount of digital material available and likely to be created in the future, it is essential to streamline the process of copyright licensing. Having easier mechanisms to obtain the appropriate copyright licences will benefit rights holders and potential licensees.

The report recommends the creation of a not-for-profit industry-led, industry-funded Copyright Hub, and the establishment of a steering group to drive forward and oversee the design and implementation of the Hub.

The Copyright Hub will have five main purposes, to:

  • act as a signpost and be a navigation mechanism to the complex world of copyright
  • be the place to go for copyright education
  • be the place where any copyright owner can choose to register works, the associated rights to those works, permitted uses and licences granted
  • be the place for potential licensees to go for easy to use, transparent, low transaction cost copyright licensing
  • be one of the authoritative places where prospective users of orphan works can go to demonstrate they have done proper, reasonable and due diligence searches for the owners of those works before they digitise them

The Government’s response to these proposals is awaited.

Key messages from the July ECR Forum! Winning grant funding and writing papers for publication.

Guidance

We’ve started a series of open forum meetings for academics at an early stage in their research careers (ECRs) to provide an opportunity to ask for advice and guidance from a team of experienced academics and research managers in an informal setting. Questions can be about anything related to research – from publications to projects to funding to research strategy! The Forums also provide an opportunity for ECRs to network with colleagues from across the University.

The first Forum meeting took place on Wednesday this week and provided seven ECRs with the opportunity to meet with Prof Stephen Page (School of Tourism), Dr Robert Britton (School of Applied Sciences) and Julia Taylor and myself from the Research & Knowledge Exchange Office (R&KEO). The main discussion points were around writing and submitting a first research proposal and writing papers for publication. The key messages were:

First research proposals – The key message here is collaboration! You need to work collaboratively with others (both at BU and external) to learn and to be successful. Ideally you should have an internal mentor in a similar research area to you who you can talk through your ideas with, who can comment on your draft proposals, and who can advise you on your career.

For large grants there are two main ways in: as a Principal Investigator (PI) on your own proposal to a dedicated ECR call or as a Co-Investigator (Co-I) on a colleagues’ proposal to a standard call. You will need to select the right scheme for you and your research. Many funders offers schemes specifically targeted at ECRs (e.g. ESRC’s Future Research Leaders scheme or EPSRC’s First Grant scheme). You will need to identify at least one experienced academic who will mentor you if the proposal is successful and to identify a suitable mentor you need to network and build relationships with experienced colleagues with similar interests. Ideally the mentor will be someone you can meet with regularly, so a colleague at BU or a University nearby is perfect. You can also submit a proposal to a standard call as Co-I with a more experienced colleague as PI. To identify a colleague to work with you need to network and meet colleagues with similar interests. Prior to submitting a collaborative bid it is beneficial to have previously worked with, or at least know, your collaborator – this is reassuring to funders as they can see evidence of an existing, productive relationship and also gives you both the confidence that you know you can work well together (this can save problems down the line if you prove to be incompatible!). Start early when writing proposals as the process will take much longer than you initially anticipate and you will need enough time to ensure your proposal can be reviewed and refined and improved throughout the writing process to ensure the best chance of success.

Also vitally important is gaining experience by submitting proposals for small research awards such as travel grants and small grants offered by charities.  The application forms are usually short so do not take a lot of time to prepare and they give you vital proposal writing practice and experience and often you receive feedback that can help develop your skills further. Small research awards are important in building and progressing your research career as they indicate that you are continuing to undertake research and that you are gaining valuable experience in budget management, project management and delivery. This is essential experience to be able to demonstrate to funders for larger funding calls that you are a capable researcher and have a track record of successful project delivery; they will also help to build your confidence as a researcher. Smaller calls often have quicker response times meaning you can use the awards to continue your research whilst you are waiting for award decisions from larger funding proposals, such as to the Research Councils.

Prior to submitting your bid externally you are strongly advised to put your draft proposal through the University’s internal peer review scheme (the RPRS). You will receive feedback from two experienced academics and from the Research Development Unit. This can help you to shape your final proposal and to ensure it stands as good a chance as possible of being awarded. At a more local level bid writing need not be a lone activity – ask more experienced colleagues in your School for their advice and guidance.

BU’s Grants Academy provides an excellent opportunity to develop the skills and expertise required to design, write and structure a competitive, fundable research proposal. Academics attend an intensive two-day training workshop delivered by Dr Martin Pickard which looks at how to write a winning grant proposal and then receive dedicated support afterwards for a period of 18 months to write research proposals. The dates for the next academic year are currently being finalised and will be published on the Blog soon however if you’d like to express your interest in joining the Academy then email Caroline O’Kane and she’ll provide further details.

Writing papers for publication – again the key message is collaboration! Single author journal papers, especially as an ECR, are becoming increasingly rare and you will need to collaborate with colleagues (at BU and at other institutions) to produce papers, particularly people with skills you don’t have. Each author should bring a new perspective and skill set to the paper. One of the benefits of collaborating with co-authors is that more experienced colleagues can offer advice and guidance and revise the paper prior to submission to the journal – this will ensure your paper has the best chance of being accepted. The different perspectives of co-authors are also very useful in developing and refining your paper. It is critical that the submitted paper is written in excellent English and many papers are rejected on the basis that the language, grammar, etc are not up to scratch. Colleagues can help with this and you should always proof-read your paper prior to submission. Match the standard of the published articles you have read in journals and use this as a guide. Always take time to craft something good – it is quality over quantity. Having 3 or 4 strong papers is much more beneficial to your career and enhances your ability to get grant funding than 10 poorer papers. Be ambitious and challenge yourself! Try submitting to a journal with an excellent reputation – if you’re not successful then try a different journal.

open access logo, Public Library of ScienceOne way to get your paper published more quickly and make your results available to a larger audience is to publish via an open access outlet. There are dedicated open access journals or you can publish via a hybrid journal (a traditional print journal that also offers an open access option). BU has been running a successful Open Access Publication Fund for just over a year now to support academics and researchers to publish via this route.

Don’t just have one thing on the go at once! – you should build a portfolio of your research and have lots of activity (papers and proposals) going on at the same time. For example, if you are awaiting a decision on a Research Council proposal then keep submitting small grant applications in the meantime, or be working on your next journal paper as soon as you’ve submitted your current one. To build your academic career you need to demonstrate consistent performance with grants and outputs and also excellence in teaching.

If you’re interested in coming to one of the next ECR Forums you will need to book to confirm your attendance (this is so we can order enough food and refreshments in advance). The next Forums are scheduled as follows (rooms to be confirmed):

17 September 12:30 – 15:00 on the Talbot Campus

19 November 12:30 – 15:00 on the Lansdowne Campus

11 December 12:30 – 15:00 on the Talbot Campus

BUCRU – Seminar presenting Breaking News!

Post-award, Publishing

 

BREAKING  NEWS…

We would like to invite you to an afternoon seminar by one of our Visiting Faculty, Professor Mike Wee, presenting some exciting new research findings to come out of a recently completed Research for Patient Benefit funded study comparing two methods of pain relief during labour (abstract and biography below).  This paper was just voted best paper of the conference at the Obstetric Anaesthetists Association Annual Conference in Liverpool and was featured recently in the Bournemouth Echo http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/9770928.Pain_relief_in_labour__study_at_Poole_hospital_makes_important_discovery/

The seminar is scheduled for Thursday 19th July 2-3pm in BG10 Bournemouth House (after the HSC end of term lunch and next door for your convenience).

We hope you can make it and look forward to seeing you then.

BUCRU

Website: http://microsites.bournemouth.ac.uk/bucru/

Administrator: +44 (0)1202 961939 / wardl@bournemouth.ac.uk

Title: The IDvIP Trial: A two-centre double blind randomised controlled trial comparing i.m. diamorphine and i.m. pethidine for labour analgesia

Research team and affiliations: MYK Wee, JP Tuckey,* P Thomas,† S Burnard,* D Jackson.

Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Poole, UK, *Royal United Hospital, Bath, UK, †Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit, Bournemouth, UK.

Abstract:

Background: Intramuscular pethidine, the commonest parenteral opioid analgesic used in obstetrics and more recently diamorphine usage has increased in the UK.  The maternal, fetal and neonatal side effects are well known for pethidine but there are no sufficiently powered large RCTs comparing pethidine with diamorphine. The aim of this trial is to address this.

Methods: After ethical approval, informed consent was obtained from 484 women randomised to receive either 7.5mg diamorphine i.m. or 150mg pethidine i.m. for labour analgesia. The sample size calculation derived from a small RCT giving 90% power (at the 5% significance level) is based upon the maternal primary outcome measure of pain relief at 60mins and the neonatal primary outcome measures of Apgar Score of <7 at 1min and neonatal resuscitation. Secondary outcome measures include verbal pain intensity at 60mins and over 3hrs post-analgesia, pain relief over first 3hrs, maternal oxygen saturation, sedation, nausea and vomiting and maternal satisfaction with analgesia. Fetal and neonatal secondary outcomes include CTG trace, meconium staining, UApH, UVpH, time of delivery to first breath, Apgar Score at 5mins, naloxone use, neonatal oxygen saturations, sedation and feeding behaviour for the first 2hrs after delivery.

Results: Reported using CONSORT guidelines. At 60mins post-administration and over a 3hr period, diamorphine is better at reducing pain scores than pethidine (p<0.001). There were no statistical differences between the two groups regarding Apgar Scores of <7 at 1min and the need for neonatal resuscitation.  The time between first dose administered and delivery is on average 82mins longer with the diamorphine group compared to pethidine (p<0.001). The vast majority of women experienced moderate to severe pain at all times. Women receiving diamorphine were more satisfied with their analgesia. There were no statistically significant differences in maternal sedation, nausea and vomiting or oxygen saturations over the 3hr period. There were no statistically significant differences in the fetal and neonatal outcomes including feeding behaviour between the two groups within 2hrs of birth but neonates in the pethidine group were more likely to be moderately or severely sedated at delivery.

Discussion: Intramuscular 7.5mg diamorphine gives significantly better analgesia than 150mg pethidine but prolongs delivery by approx. 82mins.  Women given diamorphine are more likely to be satisfied with their analgesia.  The mechanism for the prolongation of delivery time in the diamorphine group should be investigated further.

Acknowledgement: This research was funded by the NIHR Research for Patient Benefit Programme (PB-PG-0407-13170).

References

1. Tuckey JP, Prout RE, Wee MYK. Prescribing intramuscular opioids for labour analgesia in consultant-led maternity units: a survey of UK practice. International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia 2008, 17(1):3-8.

2. Fairlie FM, Marshall L, Walker JJ et al. Intramuscular opioids for maternal pain relief for labour: a randomised controlled trial comparing pethidine with diamorphine. British  Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1999; 106(11): 1181 -1187.

Biography of speaker:

Michael Wee is a consultant anaesthetist from Poole Hospital and Royal Bournemouth Hospitals.  He has a special interest in obstetric anaesthesia and is the lead obstetric anaesthetist at Poole Hospital.  He is chair of the Research and Innovations Group at Poole Hospital and is a Board member of the Western Comprehensive Local Research Network.  He was awarded a visiting professorship at Bournemouth University in 2009.  He is a referee for several medical journals.  His research interests include patient information, safety in anaesthesia, maternal analgesia and simulation in epidural anaesthesia.  He is a co-supervisor of a PhD student at BU and chief investigator of the MObs study investigating early warning scores in obstetrics.

Increasing publication impact – publishing in journals covered by the main external publication databases

Guidance, Publishing

Publishing in journals covered by the main external publication databases, such as Scopus and the Web of Science, will give your research greater visibility and will ensure that citations received are counted in your citation metrics (for example, in your Scopus H-index). The journals that tend to be covered by these external databases are the ones produced by the big publishing houses – Wiley-Blackwell, Elsevier, Springer, etc. These journals are likely to have larger readerships and greater institutional subscriptions than journals published by smaller publishers, which will increase the potential visibility of your research and therefore the potential citations/downloads.

Martin Kretschmer in the Financial Times

REF Subjects

Professor Kretschmer, Director of the Centre for Intellectual Property Policy & Management at Bournemouth University (BU) has commented in the Financial Times in a full page analysis article on rent-seeking.

The article titled ‘Barriers to break through’ discusses economic rents arising from legal monopolies, such as a limited number of taxi licences, or extended periods of copyright protection. Rents allow some to grow rich at the expense of others, and create an incentive to devote resource to lobbying in pursuit of such rents. On copyright, the article says:

“Martin Kretschmer, a law professor at Bournemouth University in England, helped to fight a losing battle against a colossal creation of rents in Europe last year: the extension of copyright on recorded music from 50 to 70 years. The new law transfers €1bn out of the pockets of European consumers and into those of music companies and ageing rock stars.”

“The social argument for copyright is that it gives an incentive for artists to create work. But, as Mr Kretschmer says, ‘the fact that the extension was retrospective gives the game away really’. The Beatles have already recorded Rubber Soul; another 20 years of royalties will not make them record it again. The consensus among academics who study the term of copyright that would best balance the interests of consumers and creators, he adds, is that ’14 years is not an unreasonable starting point’.”

‘Barriers to break through’, by Robin Harding, US economics editor, 23 February, p. 11:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7e316f80-5c80-11e1-911f-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1nyOZZ3Fk

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU) Consultancy Service

What is the Consultancy Service?

BUCRU has developed a consultancy service aimed at organisations that have an interest in health and wellbeing. Members of the team have many years experience of providing consultation services to the NHS, public bodies, charities and businesses. In addition to research projects we can also advise on audit projects, clinical evaluations, service evaluations and other areas where the collection and analysis of good quality data is important.

How can it help?

The service is flexible and tailored to the client’s requirements. Typically an initial meeting will involve finding out about the client’s needs and discussing the ways in which we can help. Our involvement could range from a single meeting to discuss a particular issue, through to conducting a project on behalf of the client.

Some examples are:

¨                  Advising on or conducting clinical trials, surveys, epidemiological studies, pilot and feasibility studies

¨                  Study design

¨                  Advice on sample size

¨                  Questionnaire design and validation

¨                  Outcome measures

¨                  Data collection and management

¨                  Statistical analysis and interpretation

¨                  Qualitative and mixed methods approaches

¨                  Design and evaluation of complex interventions such as found in medicine, psychology, nursing, physiotherapy and so on.

¨                  Managing and running studies

¨                  Advice on ethics and governance approval processes.

¨                  Involving patients and the public in research

¨                  Troubleshooting

How do I find out more?

For further information about, and access to, our consultancy service please contact:

Louise Ward (administrator):

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit

R505 Royal London House

Christchurch Road

Bournemouth BH1 3LT

BUCRU@bournemouth.ac.uk

Tel: 01202 961939

http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/bucru/

Research within the Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU)

Funding opportunities

In previous blogs we have described how BUCRU can help in developing grant applications. In this blog we describe some of the funded projects we are involved in.

BUCRU led research

Fatigue management in multiple sclerosis (MS):  We have just completed a multi-centre randomised trial of a cognitive behavioural approach to fatigue management in people with multiple sclerosis1. This project was funded by the MS Society (http://www.mssociety.org.uk).

Improving activity and wellbeing in people with MS: We are just starting a MS Society funded pilot study to look at the Nintendo Wii home gaming system as a method of helping people with MS increase their activity levels and wellbeing.

Systematic review of psychological interventions for people with MS: A small grant to update our existing Cochrane review2

BUCRU collaborative projects

IDvIP: A National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Research for Patient Benefit (RfPB) (http://www.ccf.nihr.ac.uk/RfPB/Pages/home.aspx) funded project. This is a multi-centre trial comparing 2 methods of pain relief for women in labour; diamorphine and pethidine3. The Chief Investigator is a Consultant in one of the local hospitals and a member of the Bournemouth University Visiting Faculty. BUCRU staff were involved in the design of the study, applying for the grant, data management, statistical analysis and interpretation, and advice on project management.*

WEIGHTED: A small grant from the College of Emergency Medicine held by a local Consultant/ member of the Visiting Faculty. This study is about to start and aims to develop a robust method of estimating the weight of patients attending a hospital emergency department. Many patients require a weight dependent dose of potentially life saving medication, but are too ill to be actually weighed.  BUCRU were involved in designing the study and securing funding, and will be involved in ongoing advice on project and data management, statistical analysis and interpretation.

PEARLS: A large multi-centre trial of training maternity staff in assessing and repairing tears to the perineum acquired during labour and delievery4. This project is funded by the Health Foundation (http://www.health.org.uk) and run under the auspices of the Royal College of Midwives. BUCRU has been involved in data management, statistical analysis and interpretation.

PREVIEW: A pilot randomised trial comparing two methods of looking after tears to the perineum. The Chief Investigator is based in Birmingham, and the study is funded by the NIHR RfPB funding scheme. This study has recently started, and BUCRU was involved in the design of the study and the funding application. Further involvement will be in advising on project management, data management and statistical analysis.

Clinical Doctoral Research Fellowship: (http://www.nihrtcc.nhs.uk). Award held by BU and won by a radiographer based at the Anglo-European College of Chiropractic. The project involves tracking and measuring spinal motion. The research may have important implications in diagnosing people with chronic lower back pain. BUCRU were involved in the study design and funding application, and 2 members of staff are supervisors for her PhD.

Contact us:

In the first instance please contact

Louise Ward (administrator):

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit

R505 Royal London House

Christchurch Road

Bournemouth BH1 3LT

BUCRU@bournemouth.ac.uk

Tel: 01202 961939

 http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/bucru/

1 Thomas, P.W., Thomas, S., Kersten, P., Jones, R., Nock, A., Slingsby, V., et al., 2010. Multi-centre parallel arm randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group-based cognitive behavioural appoach to managing fatigue in people with multiple sclerosis. BMC Neurology, 10:43

2 Thomas, P.W., Thomas, S., Hillier, C., Galvin, K., and Baker, R. (2006). Psychological interventions for multiple sclerosis. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Vol. Issue 1, pp. Issue 1. Art. No.: CD004431. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004431.pub2): John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.

3 Wee, M.Y.K., Tuckey, J.P., Thomas, P., Burnard, S. 2011. The IDvIP Trial: A two-centre randomized double-blind controlled trial comparing intramuscular diamorphine and intramuscular pethidine for labour analgesia. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 11: 51

4 Bick, D.E., Kettle, C., MacDonald, S., Thomas, P.W., Hill, R.K., Ismail, K.. 2010. PErineal Assessment and Repair Longitudinal Study (PEARLS): protocol for a matched pair cluster trial. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 10:10.

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU) Events and Services

Funding opportunities

BUCRU incorporates the Dorset Office of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Research Design Service – South West (RDS-SW). This means that in addition to the support outlined in previous blogs, we can also provide access to the following:

RDS Grant application workshop.

This workshop is going to be held at Bournemouth University on the 29th February 2012 (http://www.rds-sw.nihr.ac.uk/grant_workshop.htm). Although the official deadline for applying has recently passed, it is worth contacting us to see if there are any remaining places. The workshop will also be held in other locations in the South-West region in the near future.

This is a one-day workshop for researchers who are developing proposals with the intention of applying for a grant. The workshop does not provide detailed training in research methodology; rather it more generally covers the full range of issues inherent in developing a successful grant application. It will be of relevance to researchers applying to any of the major health research funders, but particularly the NIHR funding schemes.

Researchers will need to send in advance the latest draft of their research proposal. As a minimum they should have a plan for a project but, ideally, a worked up proposal, perhaps even one that has been previously rejected. All proposals will receive detailed written feedback from the RDS team.

Topics include

  • The application as a marketing document, selling the topic, selling the method, and selling the team;
  • The balanced team;
  • Clarity of description and explanation;
  • Feasibility issues;
  • Identifying and avoiding potential pitfalls

 

RDS Residential Research Retreat

The Residential Research Retreat (http://www.rds-sw.nihr.ac.uk/rrr_home.htm) provides an opportunity for research teams to develop high quality health related research proposals suitable for submission to national peer-reviewed funding schemes. The aim of the Retreat is to provide the environment and support to promote rapid progress in developing proposals over a relatively short time period.

This Research Retreat is open to health professionals and academics working within the South West. Applications to attend the Retreat should be submitted by a team of three people with varied skills. Applications are reviewed competitively and places awarded to the most promising team proposals. The deadline for the next Research Retreat has passed, but it is anticipated that applications will be invited again later in the year.  

At the retreat participants are supported by a range of experts while developing their research proposal. They work intensively on their proposal, while learning how to maximise its chances for successfully securing a grant.

In addition, the Residential Research Retreat helps participants develop the key skills needed to conduct research in a clinical setting as well as nurturing presentation skills and giving them the confidence to tackle research problems. 

 

RDS Scientific Committee

The RDS Scientific Committee (http://www.rds-sw.nihr.ac.uk/scientific_committee.htm) provides an excellent opportunity for researchers in the south-west to obtain a critical review of a proposed grant application before it is sent to a funding body. The Committee brings the benefit of seeing the proposal with “fresh eyes”, replicating as far as possible the way the real funding committee will consider the application. Committee members include senior research consultants who have considerable experience of obtaining research funding, resulting in comprehensive comments and advice fed back.

Committee meetings take place approximately 9 times per year. To submit a study for review at the meeting, study paperwork must be provided to the Committee via BUCRU two weeks prior to the meeting date, and preferably a couple of months before the intended funding deadline.

 

Centre of Postgraduate Medical Research and Education (CoPMRE) Annual Symposium

In addition to events aimed at supporting the development of grant applications we also host an event geared towards dissemination. The CoPMRE Annual Symposium will be held on the 11th September 2012 at the Bournemouth University Talbot Campus. These successful annual conferences have been running for the past nine years and have featured themes such as ‘Professionalism and Collaboration’, ’Research Innovation’ and ‘Interprofessional Learning’. This year’s theme will be on using ‘Social media techniques in healthcare research and education’.  The conference is open to all healthcare professionals and academics.  More information will be posted on our website in due course and you will be able to register online nearer the time.  For further information on the symposium please contact Audrey Dixon, Conference Manager (adixon@bournemouth.ac.uk ).

Contact us: For further information about, and access to, the Grant applications workshop, the Residential Research Retreat and the Scientific Committee please contact:

Louise Ward (administrator):

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit

R505 Royal London House

Christchurch Road

Bournemouth BH1 3LT

BUCRU@bournemouth.ac.uk

Tel: 01202 961939

http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/bucru/

BUCRU – Supporting the development of grant applications

Awarded & submitted bids, Funding opportunities, Post-award, Publishing, Research assessment

In today’s post we give a case study of how Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU) recently supported the development of a grant application.

Case study

We recently supported a Programme Development Grant (www.ccf.nihr.ac.uk/PGfAR/PDG/Pages/default.aspx) application to the National Health Service (NHS) National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The Unit receives funding from the NIHR to be the Dorset Office of the NIHR Research Design Service (RDS), and thus can support local researchers in the University and the NHS to develop their funding applications. The topic of this grant application was early warning systems for use in an obstetric setting. Early warning systems are used by clinical staff in hospital to identify clinical problems before they get too serious, for example by regularly monitoring vital signs such as blood pressure. The purpose of Programme Development Grants is to fund preliminary work ahead of a larger Programme Grant for Applied Research (PGAR; www.ccf.nihr.ac.uk/PGfAR/Pages/Home.aspx). 

This support involved:

  • Providing methodological input in systematic reviews, surveys, qualitative designs, quantitative designs notably a sample size calculation, and trial design.
  • Patient and public involvement (PPI) – the team has a designated person supporting PPI.
  • Team development – a strong team needed to be developed with the appropriate skill mix to deliver the programme of research.  Four members of BUCRU became co-applicants on the proposal bringing methodological expertise in systematic reviews, qualitative research, quantitative research, and PPI support.  Via our link with the RDS we also have access to health economist support.   Collaborations were initiated with the Wessex Health Innovation and Education Cluster (HIEC; www.wessexhiecpartnership.org.uk/) to gain support in the educational/ training aspects of the research.  
  • Liaison – we liaised with a number of different organisations, such as Research and Knowledge Exchange Operations for costing the Bournemouth University (BU) costs, the NHS host organisation that will be responsible for the research, and the Market Research Group (MRG; https://mrg.bournemouth.ac.uk/) who were involved to support the administration and data entry for the survey component of the project.
  • Identification of appropriate funding schemes.
  • Obtained peer review from RDS colleagues across the region to provide feedback on the suitability of the funding scheme and the ‘readiness’ for submission. This service is usually provided through regular Scientific Committee meetings that act as ‘mock’ funding committees (www.rds-sw.nihr.ac.uk/scientific_committee.htm).

Quote from lead applicant: “Without the expertise and assistance of BUCRU staff it would not have been possible to even contemplate applying for a large and competitive grant such as the NIHR Programme Development Grant” .

Please contact us for support with health research:

Louise Ward (administrator):

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit

R505 Royal London House

Christchurch Road

Bournemouth BH1 3LT

BUCRU@bournemouth.ac.uk

Tel: 01202 961939

http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/bucru/

People at Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU)

Awarded & submitted bids, Post-award, Publishing, Research assessment

In yesterday’s posting we gave a brief introduction to BUCRU. Today we introduce you to the members of the team.

 

Louise Ward

Louise is one of the administrators for the unit and has been with the team since 2008.  She has worked in various NHS settings and has an interest in marketing.  Both her undergraduate and Masters degrees were studied here at Bournemouth University.

Professor Paul Thompson

Paul is Consultant Rheumatologist at Poole Hospitaland Visiting Professor at BU. He was appointed Director of the Centre of Postgraduate Medical Research and Education (CoPMRE) in 2007, where he has been leading developments between research and education active doctors in NHS Trusts and the academic community at the University. He is Co-director of BUCRU, Lead for the musculoskeletal local priority group for the Western Comprehensive Local Research Network (CLRN) and Fellow of the NHS Improvement Faculty. He is interested in clinical research and service development in the rheumatic diseases. He supervises PhD students and is an External Examiner at other Universities.

Dr Sarah Thomas

Sarah is Deputy Director (methodology). She has a background in psychology and since 2000 has worked in the NHS in Dorset.  As well as supporting other researchers in a Research Design Service capacity, she also conducts research. Her main research interests are in the field of multiple sclerosis (MS) and she is currently Chief Investigator for a pilot study funded by the UK MS Society exploring the use of the Nintendo Wii™ in people with MS.

Professor Peter Thomas

Peter is Co-Director and leads on research methodology. He has a background in epidemiology and statistics, and has been with Bournemouth University since 1996. He has a special research interest in psychosocial aspects of chronic disease and much of his recent work has focussed on multiple sclerosis.

Dr Zoe Sheppard

Zoe is a demographer with particular experience investigating socio-economic status.  She joined Bournemouth University in October 2009 as a Research Fellow in Research Methods.  She provides research methods support for people doing health research and support writing grant applications in her National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Research Design Service (RDS) capacity.

Suzanne Sheppard

Suzanne is a Clinical Researcher recently recruited from the pharmaceutical industry to help manage the unit’s clinical trials.  She has experience in setting-up and monitoring clinical trials across phases 1 to 3 in a variety of therapeutic areas. 

Annabel Kenny

Annabel is a Clinical Research Administrator who joined Bournemouth University in October 2009.  She provides support to Dr. Tamas Hickish, Consultant Medical Oncologist, Royal Bournemouth Hospital/Poole Hospital and the rest of the research team on various ongoing research projects within the Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit.

Liz Griffiths

Liz works for the Royal Bournemouth Hospital as a research facilitator.  She has been working in research within the NHS since 2003 in a variety of roles.  Currently focusing on supporting researchers to develop proposals and prepare submissions to regulatory authorities.

Louise Fazakarley

Louise is a Physiotherapy lecturer with experience in neurological rehabilitation, the management of chronic disability and rehabilitation research. She joined Bournemouth University in 2006 to establish and teach on the BSc (Hons) Physiotherapy course. Louise is currently working on the MS Society funded pilot study to look at the Nintendo Wii™ as a method of helping people with MS increase their physical activity.

Audrey Dixon

Audrey is the Centre of Postgraduate Medical Research and Education (CoPMRE) co-ordinator and co-administrator for BUCRU.  She has worked for the NHS since 1988.  She first joined Professor Paul Thompson in 2001 to assist him with his academic work, following his secondment to the university.  Audrey was seconded to BU in 2003.  She now looks after a growing Visiting Faculty of 41 members and the education arm of CoPMRE. She is very proud to see the little acorn grow into a Centre of Postgraduate Medical Research and Education and BUCRU.

Roger Baker

Roger is Professor of Clinical Psychology and runs the MSc course Foundations in Clinical Psychology at BU. He is also a Consultant Clinical Psychologist at Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust.  He has expertise in the design of assessments and questionnaires, research design and clinical evaluation of services and has worked in a dual role as researcher and clinical psychologist at Leeds, Aberdeen & Bournemouth Universities and in NHS Trusts specialising in Mental Health.

Helen Allen

Helen is a health psychologist with a nursing and midwifery background.  She has a qualitative background with a particular interest in the mind:body interface and chronic disease, including patient empowerment.  She is the Unit lead on Public Patient Involvement.

Contact us: In the first instance please contact:

 Louise Ward (administrator):

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit

R505 Royal London House

Christchurch Road

Bournemouth BH1 3LT

BUCRU@bournemouth.ac.uk

Tel: 01202 961939

http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/bucru/

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU)

Awarded & submitted bids, Post-award, Publishing, Research assessment

This week the Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU) will be posting daily blogs. In these blogs we will tell you a little about the Unit, what we do, who we are, and how we might be able to help in your research endeavours.

What is BUCRU?  

BUCRU is a new model for supporting and conducting health related research in Dorset. It supports researchers in improving the quality, quantity and efficiency of research across the University and local National Health Service (NHS) Trusts. It does this by:

  • helping researchers with developing high quality applications for external research funding (including small grants)
  • ongoing involvement in funded research projects
  • a “pay-as-you-go” consultation service for other work

How can BUCRU help?

BUCRU can provide help in the following areas:

  • Study design
  • Quantitative and qualitative research methods
  • Statistics, data management and data analysis
  • Patient and public involvement in research
  • Trial management
  • Ethics, governance and other regulatory issues
  • Linking University and NHS researchers

BUCRU focuses on health research that has relevance to the NHS. The Unit is available to Bournemouth University staff and people working locally in the NHS. There are no general restrictions on topic area or professional background of the researcher. However we do have special interests in areas such as chronic disease and complex interventions (interventions in nursing, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, psychology and so on).

How is it funded?  

BUCRU is partly funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and incorporates the Dorset office of the NIHR Research Design Service (http://www.rds-sw.nihr.ac.uk). Further funding comes from a variety of research grants and contracts.

Contact us: In the first instance please contact

Louise Ward (administrator):

Bournemouth University Clinical Research Unit

R505 Royal London House

Christchurch Road

Bournemouth BH1 3LT

BUCRU@bournemouth.ac.uk

Tel: 01202 961939

http://blogs.bournemouth.ac.uk/bucru/

Critical thinking and professional judgement for social work

Professional judgement, communication and critical reflection are vital aspects of a social worker’s role and a new book, ‘Critical thinking and professional judgement for social work’, aims to empower post-qualifying students to develop these skills.

The front cover of 'Critical Thinking and Professional Judgement for Social Work'Author Lynne Rutter from the Centre for Post Qualifying Social Work at Bournemouth University explains more about professional learning, a new way of thinking and her own research.

“I am intrigued by the psychology associated with learning. It is obviously an emotional and very personal experience, especially for qualified practitioners, but it should also be an empowering experience.

“For me, professional higher education is about developing more complex thinking which has practical, reflective, personal, moral, as well as objective, conceptual and theoretical aspects. All these aspects are part of professional reasoning and judgement and ultimately professional understanding and knowledge, and so are equally important.

“My journey has led me to understand that there is a productive and empowering synergy here if no one aspect is privileged over the others and if a professional perspective becomes a focus. These were very important elements within the professional doctorate which made it very meaningful and useful for my own practice. The book brings much of this work together and aims to highlight and develop the complex thinking associated with professional learning as a key part of developing confidence and authority in a professional role.”

Order a copy of ‘Critical thinking and professional judgement for social work’.

RCUK launches the ROS!

Guidance

Last month Anita posted on the blog about the forthcoming RCUK Research Outcomes System (ROS) due to be launched imminently. That time has now come and the system is now live!

As of this week the ROS goes live for grant holders of AHRC, BBSRC, ESRC and EPSRC awards. The MRC and STFC are using the e-Val system and at present NERC is currently continuing to use its Research Outputs Database (ROD) until a decision has been reached regarding which collection system to replace it with. This week RCUK will be emailing all PIs of live awards with AHRC, ESRC and EPSRC to launch the ROS.

The ROS is a website that allows users to provide information about research outcomes to four Research Councils – AHRC, BBSRC, ESRC and EPSRC. Outcomes are categorised into nine areas:

  • Publications
  • Other Research Outputs
  • Collaboration/Partnership
  • Further Funding
  • Staff Development
  • Dissemination/Communication
  • IP and Exploitation
  • Award/Recognition
  • Impact

The Research Councils will use the information to inform their analysis of research investments.

The ROS will be available at www.rcuk.ac.uk/researchoutcomes and you can log-in using your Je-S account details.

A number of us in the R&KEO have viewed a demonstration of the new system and are able to help / advise as necessary. The system is fairly intuitive and RCUK have produced some good online guidance (recorded demonstrations or written help sheets), but do let me know if you have any questions and we’ll be happy to help.

Responsibility for updating the ROS lies with the PI, although Co-Is should also have access to update joint grants. The Research Councils will be undertaking an audit of how the ROS is being used in March 2012 so we will be looking at the system at the end of January 2012 to see the level of engagement and offering help where necessary.

Some key features of the ROS are as follows:

  • Outcomes can be inputted at any time during the lifetime of a grant and beyond, not just at the end as with a final report.
  • Existing data can be uploaded from HEIs own research information systems, therefore minimising the burden of having to re-submit information to the Research Councils. (We are currently investigating how best to do this at BU using the new publications management system BRIAN).
  • A bulk upload option allows multiple outcomes for multiple grant holders to be inputted at the same time, therefore saving time and effort.
  • HEIs will have access to the information submitted by grant holders from their institution to the ROS.
  • Access to ROS can be delegated to any other Je-S registered users, including joint investigators or co-investigators, and research managers.
  • Outcomes can be attributed to funding from more than one Research Council.
  • The ROS takes account of and, where possible, accommodates the reporting requirements of other bodies, for example the UK Funding Councils’ Research Excellence Framework (REF) and Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) data returns.

You can read more about the ROS on the RCUK website here (including a set of excellent FAQs): http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/Pages/ResearchOutcomesProject.aspx

Report: skills for a Green Economy

This is a joint HM Government report with contributions from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, the Department of Energy and Climate Change, and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
http://www.bis.gov.uk/policies/further-education-skills/skills-for-green-economy
It reports on a project undertaken to identify the skills needed for a transition to a green economy. It is not directed at HE but begs the question as to what kind of curriculum we might have at BU to ensure that our students are adequately prepared for a green economy and can contribute to sustainable development?