

Latest research and knowledge exchange news at Bournemouth University
At the online editorial board meeting today [Saturday 29th June] of the Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology I had the pleasure of seeing Bournemouth University’s latest paper ‘The Importance of Positionality for Qualitative Researchers‘ ahead of publication [1]. The lead author of this paper is Hannah Gurr and this methodology paper is part of her M.Res. research project in Social Work. Hannah is supervised by Dr. Louise Oliver, Dr. Orlanda Harvey and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences (FHSS).
Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology is a Gold Open Access journal so when it appears online it will be free to read for anybody across the globe.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health
Reference:
This morning ResearchGate alerted us that our paper published two decades ago ‘The Importance of Pilot Studies’ has now been cited one thousand times [1]. This methods paper in the Nursing Standard is very often used by authors quoting a paper in their research methods section when they have done pilot or feasibility study for a larger-scale study. This paper is also our second top cited paper with 1,982 citations on Google Scholar and, interestingly enough, on SCOPUS it is not listed at all.
Pilot studies are a crucial element of a good study design. Conducting a pilot study does not guarantee success in the main study, but it does increase the likelihood of success. Pilot studies fulfill a range of important functions and can provide valuable insights for other researchers. There is a need for more discussion among researchers of both the process and outcomes of pilot studies.
This paper is one of several methods paper focusing on pilot studies we have published over the past 22 years [2-7].
Professors Vanora Hundley & Edwin van Teijlingen
Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health
References:
Today, Sunday 9th June, our paper ‘Health and well-being of Nepalese migrant workers abroad was highlighted by ResearchGate as being widely read. This scientific paper which was part of Dr. Pratik Adhikary’s PhD study in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences has been read 1,000 times.
The Month in Research
The Month in Research is our monthly round-up sharing research and knowledge exchange successes from the previous month, showcasing the great work taking place across BU.
Your achievements
Thank you to everyone who has used the online form to put forward their achievements, or those of colleagues, this month.
Funding
Congratulations to all those who have had funding for research and knowledge exchange projects and activities awarded in May. Highlights include:
Publications
Congratulations to all those who have had work published across the last month. Below is a selection of publications from throughout May:
Content for The Month in Research has been collected using the research and knowledge exchange database (RED), the Bournemouth University Research Online (BURO) repository and submissions via The Month in Research online form. It is by no means intended to be an exhaustive list. All information is correct as of 31.5.24.
Please use The Month in Research online form to share your highlights and achievements, or those of colleagues, for the next monthly round-up.
Earlier this week ResearchGate alerted us that the paper ‘The Growing Importance of Mixed-Methods Research in Health‘ has been read 900 times on that platform [1]. This methods paper focuses on the growing importance of mixed-methods research to a wide range of health disciplines ranging from nursing to epidemiology.
Mixed-methods approaches requires not only the skills of the individual quantitative and qualitative methods but also a skill set to bring two methods/datasets/findings together in the most appropriate way. Health researchers need to pay careful attention to the ‘best’ approach to designing, implementing, analysing, integrating both quantitative (number) and qualitative (word) information and writing this up in a way that enhances its applicability and broadens the evidence-based practice. This paper highlights the strengths and weaknesses of mixed-methods approaches as well as some of the common mistakes made by researchers applying mixed-methods for the first time.
Our team in the Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health (CMWH) has written several other methods papers on the importance of mixed-methods research in community-based health studies [2-5]. We have, of course, conducted and published many mixed-methods studies over the past two decades [see for example 6-10].
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
References:
The fourth International Conference on Medical and Health Sciences in September 2024 aims to bring together researchers, practitioners, and policymakers from around the world to discuss the latest advancements, challenges, and innovations in the field of medical and health sciences. Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen co-director of the Centre for Midwifery and Women’s Health (CMWH) has been invited as a keynote speaker. He will be addressing the issue of being a interdisciplinary researcher in a larger research team.
Last week we found out that the paper ‘Moral panic, fear, stigma, and discrimination against returnee migrants and Muslim populations in Nepal: analyses of COVID-19 media content’ was published by the Journal of Media Studies [1]. This latest paper is co-authored by Dr. Nirmal Aryal and Dr. Pramod Regmi in the Department of Nursing Sciences, Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen in the Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health (CMWH), as well as former BU employee Dr. Shovita Dhakal Adhokari. The published paper addresses the effects of COVID-19 stereotyping and so-called ‘othering’ on migrant workers returning home to Nepal is the latest article in a long line of publications by Faculty of Health and Social Sciences (FHSS) academics.
This BU team (including former and current PhD students) has published over thirty papers on a wide range of aspects related to migrant and their work, health and well-being [2-31].
References:
Designing and Conducting Practice-Based Research Projects: A Practical Guide for Arts Student Researchers by Bournemouth University Associate Professor Lyle Skains is available from today.
The book is aimed primarily at upper undergraduate and Master’s students undertaking practice-based research in the arts, though it is also suitable for PhD candidates and researchers and supervisors new to practice-based research projects.
The discussion starts with definitions and a brief background to practice-related research in the arts and contextualization of practice-based methods within that frame. The bulk of the text is a step-by-step approach to designing, conducting, and writing-up practice-based research projects; each step is supplemented with examples of practice-related research, exercises for progressing methods design and evaluating research approach, and lists for further reading.
Designing and Conducting Practice-Based Research Projects has been requested and should soon be available through the Bournemouth University Library.
Today ResearchGate informed us that the academic paper `Whose Shoes?` Can an educational board game engage Ugandan men in pregnancy and childbirth? published in 2018 by former Ph.D. student Dr. Alice Ladur has been read 600 times. The paper appeared in the Open Access journal BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth. Alice was based in the Centre for Midwifery and Women Health (CMWH) and supervised by professors Vanora Hundley and Edwin van Teijlingen.
Men can play a significant role in reducing maternal morbidity and mortality in low-income countries such as Uganda. Maternal health programmes are increasingly looking for innovative interventions to engage men to help improve health outcomes for pregnant women. Educational board games offer a unique approach to present health information where learning is reinforced through group discussions supporting peer-to-peer interactions. Alice conducted interviews with men from Uganda currently living in the UK on their views of an educational board game. Men were asked their perceptions on whether a board game was relevant as a health promotional tool in maternal health prior to implementation in Uganda.
The results of the pilot study were promising; participants reported the use of visual aids and messages were easy to understand and enhanced change in perspective. Men in this study were receptive on the use of board games as a health promotional tool and recommended its use in rural Uganda. The paper concluded that key messages from the focus group appeared to be that the board game is more than acceptable to fathers and that it needs to be adapted to the local context to make it suitable for men in rural Uganda
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Reference:
Today the Open Access journal Health Prospect published our paper ‘ChatGPT: Challenges to editors and examiners’ [1]. The past year saw an exponential growth in the use of machine learning using AI (artificial intelligence) and particularly Generative AI (GenAI) such as ChatGPT. The latter has seen a spectacular rise in the public debate and in the mass media. Those not involved in the development of AI were amazed by the capabilities of ChatGPT to produce text equal to the average human produced texts. There is no doubt that the adoption of AI is advancing rapidly.
To test the ability of ChatGPT in its free version, we posed simple questions about migrant workers in Nepal, a topic we have published about widely. After reading the short essay produced by ChatGPT on that question, we repeated the question whilst asking for references to be included. We were surprised by the quality of this very general piece of work. In many UK universities, including at Bournemouth University, there is a debate about students’ use of ChatGPT. We all recognise how difficult it is to distinguish between work produced by the average student and that produced by AI. There is a similar problem for editors and reviewers of academic journals. It really boils down to the question: ‘How can you be certain the submitted manuscript came from a human source?’ However, we feel the progress of AI is not all doom and gloom. The paper also outlines some of the key problems around AI and academic publishing, but also opportunities arising from the use of AI in this area.
The authors of this paper are based at Bournemouth University, the University of Strathclyde, and the University of Huddersfield.
Reference:
Fifteen years ago I started as a professor in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences. I have had three different job titles without moving jobs, starting in 2009 with ‘Professor of Maternal & Perinatal Health Research’, which, after a few years, changed to ‘Professor of Reproductive Health Research,’ and again then a few years later dropping the ‘Research’ to my current title of ‘Professor of Reproductive Health’. During these 15 years there have been major changes especially in terms of research in our Faculty. There has been a growth in quantity as well as quality as reflected in our REF scores in 2014 and 2021! We also have a much higher proportion of staff with a PhD then when I started. Currently, I am the Research Culture Champion for our Faculty, tasked with a small team to strengthen our research culture and profile even further.
At a personal level, I have supervised 17 PhD students to completion at BU in the past 15 years, plus an additional nine students registered elsewhere. The latter were mainly PhD students from the University of Aberdeen whom I continued to supervise. Interestingly, two of these Aberdeen PhD students ended up working for BU. I counted 42 PhD viva as external examiner in this period as well as five as internal BU examiner. Some of my experiences at BU were captured last year when I was interviewed by the editors of a sociology journal based in Nepal. [1]
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
CMWH (Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health)
References:
References:
Yesterday our latest methodological paper ‘Methods or Methodology: Terms That Are Too Often Confused’ appeared online. [1] We recently published a methods paper outlining the difference between Methods and Methodology as so many postgraduate students manage to get it wrong or don’t understand the distinction between the two. There is a distinct difference between methodology and methods in research. However, too many students, researchers, and authors of academic papers do not seem to pay attention to the crucial difference. This is true not only in education research but also in many other academic disciplines. In simple terms, the term methods refers to the research tools and techniques; for example, in the qualitative field, interviews are a tool to collect data, and in the quantitative field, a questionnaire-based survey is an example of a data collection tool. Methodology is a broader concept as it refers to the overall approach to the research, includes a justification for this approach, and links to research philosophy, i.e., how we produce knowledge. This methodological note aims to explain the confusion, drawing on examples from the published literature in education research and beyond. It also considers the complexities and crossovers. The final section ends with key advice to researchers and authors on key mistakes to avoid regarding the difference between methods and methodology, including covering this in early supervision discussions.
Our interdisciplinary team, based in the UK and Nepal, comprises Dr. Orlanda Harvey in BU’s Department of Sociology & Social Work, Dr. Pramod Regmi in BU’s Department of Nursing Science, Dr. Preeti Mahato from Royal Holloway, University of London, Dr. Shovita Dhakal Adhikari, London Metropolitan University, Dr. Rolina Dhital, based at Health Action & Research in Nepal and Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen in BU’s Department of Midwifery & Health Sciences. In addition it is worth mentioning that both Preeti and Shovita are both former member of staff in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences (FHSS) at BU. Finally, although the official publication date is Sept 2023, it only appeared online yesterday. This new methods paper is part of growing series of methods papers by members of this team of academics [2-12].
References:
Bournemouth University of part of a research consortium that has recently been awarded a Dissemination Award from the Medical Research Foundation (MRF). Last week the MRF announced that it has granted £30,294 for a project to ‘Strengthening Nepal’s health systems’. This Dissemination Award has been offered to expand the reach and impact of our recently completed study which was funded by the UK Health Systems Research Initiative [Grant ref. MR/T023554/1]. In this larger Nepal Federal Health System Project we studied the effects on the health system of Nepal’s move from a centralised political system to a more federal government structure in 2015. This interdisciplinary project was led by the University of Sheffield in collaboration with Bournemouth University, the University of Huddersfield, Canterbury Christ Church University and two institutions in Nepal: MMIHS (Manmohan Memorial Institute of Health Sciences) and PHASE Nepal.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
CMWH
This week the Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health (APJPH) accepted our latest paper from our research on the impact of the federalisation of the health care system in Nepal. This paper ‘COVID-19 as a challenge to Nepal’s newly federalised health system: capacities, responsibilities, and mindsets’ has Bikesh Koirala as first author [1].
This recently completed study was funded by the UK Health Systems Research Initiative [Grant ref. MR/T023554/1]. In this larger Nepal Federal Health System Project we studied the effects on the health system of Nepal’s move from a centralised political system to a more federal government structure in 2015. This joint project was led by the University of Sheffield in collaboration with Bournemouth University, the University of Huddersfield, Canterbury Christ Church University and two higher education institutions in Nepal: MMIHS (Manmohan Memorial Institute of Health Sciences) and PHASE Nepal.
This is the seventh paper from our collaboration. Previous papers focused on a wide range of aspects of this interdisciplinary study, including on its methods, participatory policy analysis, the WHO (World Health Organization) health systems building blocks, and public health [2-7].
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
CMWH (Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health)
References:
Congratulation to Dr. Orlanda Harvey (Social Work), Dr. Terri Cole (Psychology) and Dr. Jane Healy (Criminology) who in collaboration with Jade Levell, a colleague at the University of Bristol, had their article ‘Explorations of attitudes towards accessibility and accessing domestic violence and abuse (DVA) perpetrator support programmes by victim-survivors and perpetrators across five European countries’ accepted by the journal Abuse: An International Impact Journal [1]. This paper reports on an international mixed-methods study exploring victim-survivors and perpetrators’ attitudes towards perpetrator support programmes. The study includes a questionnaire survey of victim-survivors and interviews with male perpetrators conducted in five European countries.
Results showed that of the 93 victim-survivors of domestic violence and abuse, half stated they would have stayed in their relationship with perpetrators if the abuse had stopped, and a similar number reported that they believed their relationships would have been different had there been help for the perpetrator. Analysis of perpetrator interviews showed that they faced barriers to obtaining support, such as being labelled a ‘perpetrator’ which, had they been addressed, may have enhanced their engagement with services. Whilst acknowledging the need for safeguarding and justice, this paper demonstrates the importance of reflecting both victim-survivor and perpetrator needs in order for perpetrators to fully engage with support services. Moreover, it highlighted the need to address the underlying societal issues related to hegemonic masculinity, which can lead to the abuse of women being normalised and the vulnerability of men being stigmatised, through education for young people around healthy relationships.
Congratulations
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health
Reference:
Harvey H., Cole T., Levell, J., Healy J. (2024) ‘Explorations of attitudes towards accessibility and accessing domestic violence and abuse (DVA) perpetrator support programmes by victim-survivors and perpetrators across five European countries’, Abuse: An International Impact Journal 5(1): 26-45 https://doi.org/10.37576/abuse.2024.055
This book employs both ethnographic and secondary, archival data, drawing on a rich, fascinating trove of original material from the pre-1940s to the present day. It offers a unique historiographic study of twentieth century Methodist missionary work and women’s active expression of faith, practised at the critical confluence of historical and global changes. The study focuses on two English Methodist missionary nursing Sisters and siblings, Audrey and Muriel Chalkely, whose words and experiences are captured in detail, foregrounding tumultuous socio-political changes of the end of Empire and post-Independence in twentieth century Kenya and South India.
This work presents a timely revision to prevailing postcolonial critiques in placing the fundamental importance of human relationships centre stage. Offering a detailed (auto)biographical and reflective narrative, this ‘herstory’ pivots on three main thematic strands relating to people, place and passion, where socio-cultural details are vividly explored.
Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen
Centre for Midwifery & Women’ Health (CMWH)