Creating a new Harvard referencing guide at the University of Lincoln

Development of a Harvard referencing guide and app by the Library at the University of Lincol

Referencing handbook: Harvard

University of Lincoln approved guide to Harvard referencing. Providing guidelines on how to reference 75 sources of information. The second edition includes extended guidance on how to reference, all new examples, additional annotated diagrams and an index to help you locate sources

Systematic review: the barriers and facilitators for minority ethnic groups in accessing urgent and prehospital care

Introduction Research addressing inequalities has focused predominantly on primary and community care; few initiatives relate to the prehospital environment. We aimed to identify in the literature barriers or facilitators experienced by patients from black and minority ethnic (BME) communities in accessing prehospital care and to explore the causes and consequences of any differences in delivery. Methods We conducted a systematic literature review and narrative synthesis. Electronic and journal hand searches from 2003 through 2013 identified relevant evaluative studies (systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials, quasi-experimental, case and observational studies). A researcher extracted data to determine characteristics, results and quality, each checked by a second reviewer. The main outcome measures were delays in patient calls, mortality rates and 30-days survival post discharge. Results Eighteen studies met criteria for the review: two concerned services in England and Wales and 15 were United States based. Reported barriers to accessing care were generic (and well-known) given the heterogeneity of BME groups: difficulties in communication where English was the patient’s second language; new migrants’ lack of knowledge of the health care system leading to inappropriate emergency calls; and cultural assumptions among clinical staff resulting in inappropriate diagnoses and treatment. There were limited reported facilitators to improvement, such as the need for translation services and staff education, but the latter were poorly described or developed. Where outcomes were discussed, there was evidence for race-related disparity in mortality and survival rates. This could reflect differences in condition severity, delays between onset and initiation of calls, or the scope of response and assistance. Conclusion The paucity of literature and difficulties of transferring findings from US to UK context identified an important research gap. Further studies should be undertaken to investigate UK differences in prehospital care and outcomes for BME groups, followed by qualitative approaches to understand barriers and enablers to equitable access

The benefits of buddying

In June 2009, a meeting was held with Marishona Ortega (Academic Subject Librarian), Philippa Dyson and Lys Ann Reiners (Deputy Librarians) to discuss the principles of developing a mentoring system within the library at the University of Lincoln. During discussions we felt it important to develop something new that would create an ethos of mutual support within the department and this is where we felt buddying would be a step forward. So what is buddying? The National Council for Voluntary Organisations defines it as ‘a system for ena-bling peers to support each other by sharing experiences, offering advice and providing a sounding board for ideas and problems. Buddying is different from mentoring, which is a more formal and structured rela-tionship where the mentor is typically in a more senior role than the mentee.’ 1 The strength of buddying is that it takes the view that both partners can offer each support and opportunities to learn whatever role they fulfil. The buddying relationship need not and possibly should not be a permanent arrangement. Ideally, staff should change buddies regularly to ensure a broad range of perspectives is achieved as per the recom-mendations of Urquhart et al and Cunningham

A pre-hospital mixed methods systematic review protocol

Introduction: Mixed methods research, a methodology entailing the integration of qualitative and quantitative data within a single study, offers researchers the ability to investigate complex processes and systems in health and healthcare. The collective strength gained through the data combination can provide an enhanced understanding of research problems, providing an ideal solution to understanding complex clinical issues in a range of settings. In pre-hospital practice, where often uncontrollable variables and environmental considerations increase healthcare complexity, mixed methods has emerged as a valuable approach to research. Aims: Given the exponential growth of pre-hospital mixed methods research since the publication of our first systematic review in 2014, we aim to provide an update. Our review will explore how mixed methods is utilised in pre-hospital research and identify what standards of reporting are achieved. Methods: This systematic review update will search MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, Embase and Scopus bibliographic databases from 1 January 2012 to 15 March 2023, using an updated pre-hospital search strategy. Study screening will be performed in duplicate. Articles reported in English, explicitly stating the use of 'mixed methods' in the pre-hospital ambulance setting, including helicopter emergency medical services and community first-responder services, will be included. Data related to underpinning philosophy or theoretical framework, rationale for utilising mixed methods, background of the corresponding author, mode of data integration, model of publication and adherence to reporting standards, utilising the good reporting of a mixed methods study (GRAMMS) guidelines, will be extracted and analysed. All extracted data from study articles will be summarised in a table, allowing analysis of included studies against specified criteria

Patient, family member, and ambulance staff experiences of prehospital acute pain management in adults: A systematic review and meta-synthesis.

Background We aimed to synthesize the qualitative experiences of patients, their family members, and ambulance staff involved in the prehospital management of acute pain in adults and generate recommendations to improve the quality of care. Methods A systematic review was conducted following the enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research (ENTREQ) guidelines. We searched from inception to June 2021: MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, PsycINFO and Web of Science (search alerts were screened up to December 2021). Articles were eligible for inclusion if they reported qualitative data and were published in the English language. The Critical Appraisal Skills Program for qualitative studies checklist was used to assess risk of bias, thematic synthesis was performed on included studies and recommendations for clinical practice improvement were generated. Results Twenty-five articles were included in the review, representing over 464 patients, family members, and ambulance staff from 8 countries. Six analytical themes and several recommendations to improve clinical practice were generated. Strengthening the patient–clinician relationship by building trust, promoting patient empowerment, addressing patient needs and expectations, and providing a holistic approach to pain treatment is key to improving prehospital pain management in adults. Shared pain management guidelines and training across the prehospital and emergency department intersection should improve the patient journey. Conclusion Interventions and guidelines that strengthen the patient-clinician relationship and span the prehospital and emergency department phase of care are likely to improve the quality of care for adults suffering acute pain in the prehospital setting

Developing the Future Academic Workforce: Early Career Academics: A systematic review

The aims of this review were to: (a) identify the experiences of clinical practitioners following the transition from clinical practice to academia (b) identify the barriers and facilitators to successful transition into academia as a novice academic (c) identify strategies to support the transition from expert healthcare practitioner to novice academic. Design A systematic review of published, peer-reviewed, original research exploring the experiences of novice academics following a career as a healthcare practitioner. Data Sources Six electronic databases were searched: CINAHL Complete (EBSCO),  Medline (EBSCO), Scopus (Elsevier), Web of Science (all databases) (Clarivate), British Education Index (EBSCO) and ERIC – Education Resources Information Center (EBSCO). Review Methods Three authors independently screened the literature using agreed inclusion and exclusion criteria. Themes were extracted from each selected study and synthesised to address the aims of the review. Results 20 studies were retrieved and included in the review. Themes identified included: lack of mentorship or the person to ask; lack of preparedness for the role; balancing workload with teaching requirements and maintaining a work-life balance; building relationships and career progression. Conclusion Novice healthcare practitioners that have transitioned from a role as an expert practitioner to novice academic need to be supported with robust mentorship, time to learn and develop as an academic and to receive the practical and theoretical skills to become a confident and accomplished teacher, scholar and academic. Impact This review addresses the problems faced by expert clinical practitioners transitioning to the role of novice academic. Understanding the challenges faced by new healthcare academics allows education providers to consider how to support, nurture and retain aspiring academics of the future when navigating the challenges of returning to novice status. This review provides healthcare education providers with recommendations of strategies to consider when identifying how to prepare and support new academics

Developing the Future Academic Workforce: The Experiences of Early Career Academics from Health and Social Care Registered Professions - A survey of academic staff

Aim: To explore the experiences of new academics transitioning from clinical practice into academia. Background: Previous research has focused on support offered to practitioners after taking up new academic posts, but support prior to this transition to help set realistic expectations about the nature and demands of the role is lacking. Design: A cross-sectional survey. Methods: An electronic survey (March-June 2022) using two validated measures were used; an amended version of the Career Transition Inventory (CTI), and the HEXACO personality trait measure. The survey included open questions (analysed thematically) to elicit further detail. Ethical approval was granted by the University of Lincoln. Results: The CTI showed strong agreement with a range of statements such as “I felt overwhelmed in my first year of academia”, “my line manager supported me during my probationary period”, and “I felt as though I had made the right decision to move from a clinical/professional role to an academic role”, suggesting the transition to academia was a difficult process but that help was received when required. Despite the challenges faced in transitioning, most participants felt it was a good decision. The HEXACO personality trait measure suggested that higher levels of extraversion seemed to be associated with a more positive transition from a clinical role to an academic role. The qualitative data resulted in four themes: (1) a need to do something different (2) expectations not reflecting reality (3) importance of support, (4) transformative experience. Conclusion: Feelings like a novice again highlighted the importance of support and preparation for role transition. Data from this study suggest training or exposure prior to applying for an academic post may help to align people’s expectations and reduce the pressure felt when entering a world which is unknown to them. Higher Education Institutes are ideally placed to offer pre-transition preparation programmes

Developing the Future Academic Workforce: The Experiences of Early Career Academics from Health and Social Care Registered Professions – Factors influencing transition: development of an academic transition measure

Aim: Development and initial testing of a Transition to Academia from Practice (TAP) measure.    Background: Previous research has explored the psychological resources employed by a person when deciding to transition in their career, resulting in the development of the Career Transition Inventory (CTI). The transition to academia has been explored in studies, however, there appears to be no specific measure for this career change. Design: A cross-sectional survey.  Methods: A survey was designed centred on the five factors measured in the CTI with the questions amended to reflect transitioning from clinical practice to academia, based on findings from qualitative research in this area. Responses from 122 participants, across a range of countries and clinical professions, provided the data for developing the TAP. Reliability testing and factor analysis was conducted using JASP to test and refine the TAP. Ethical approval was granted by the University of Lincoln.  Results: The initial 72-item survey resulted in a Cronbach’s alpha of α=0.812. Principal component factor analysis revealed support for the five factors, with the addition of subfactors and identification of an outcome variable. (1) Readiness with subfactors “understanding the role” and “motivations and desires”, (2) Confidence with subfactors “confidence in expertise”, “confidence in role”, and “confidence in transition”, (3) Control with subfactors “in control” and “adaptation”, (4) Internal support, and (5) External factors. Factor 5 revealed a further factor relating to “intention to stay” which on reflection, was the outcome for a successful transition rather than a prerequisite for undertaking a change. The final measure resulted in 50 items and 3 questions to measure a successful transition. Conclusion: The TAP helps to understand the factors that result in a successful transition to academia which may help to develop support for professionals who are contemplating the transition

Systematic review: barriers and facilitators for minority ethnic groups accessing urgent and prehospital care

Background Research addressing inequalities has focussed predominantly on primary and acute care. We aimed to identify barriers or facilitators to people from minority ethnic groups accessing prehospital care and to explore the causes and consequences of any differences in delivery. Methodology We conducted a systematic literature review and narrative synthesis. Electronic searches from 2003 through to 2013 identified studies; systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials, quasi-experimental, case and observational studies. A researcher extracted data to determine characteristics, results and quality, each checked by a second reviewer. Outcome measures were delays in patient calls, mortality rates and survival to 30 days post-discharge. Results Sixteen studies met criteria for the review, two from the UK and 14 from the United States. Barriers to accessing care included difficulties in communication where English was the patient’s second language, new migrants’ lack of knowledge of the healthcare system leading to inappropriate calls and cultural assumptions among clinical staff resulting in inappropriate treatment. There were limited facilitators to access including translation services and staff education, but the latter were poorly described or developed. Where outcomes were discussed, there was evidence for ethnicity-related disparity in mortality and survival rates. This could reflect differences in condition severity, delays between onset and initiation of calls, or the scope of response and assistance. Implications The paucity of literature and difficulties of transferring findings from US to UK context identified an important research gap. Further studies should be undertaken to investigate UK differences in prehospital care and outcomes for minority ethnic groups