X Close

Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care Blog

Home

Menu

Archive for the 'Education' Category

What’s law got to do with it?: Reflecting on my time in the Q-DaPS team as an In2research student

By Eleanor Mason, on 17 July 2025

Student Shania Essah Aurelio shares her experience with the Q-DaPS (Qualitative Data Preservation and Sharing) team at the UCL Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care through In2research. In2research is a one-year programme developed by In2scienceUK and UCL, designed to enhance access to postgraduate research degrees and career opportunities for people from low socioeconomic backgrounds and under-represented groups. 

Why I chose this placement

The Q-DaPS study is a multidisciplinary research study led by academics and Public & Patient Involvement (PPI) experts. It is funded by the NIHR School for Primary Care Research (FR4 – Project No. 596).

The study’s primary objective is to create a centralised repository for qualitative health and social care data that is secure and trustworthy. To inform the repository’s design and infrastructure, this study involved interviews with data professionals and qualitative researchers as well as focus group discussions with PPI collaborators who have previous experience of participating in primary care research.

Despite not coming from a medical sociology background, I applied to the Q-DaPS project for three main reasons:

  1. I was curious to look at health data from a different perspective. For context, I was completing my Masters degree in Law at the time, where I had been researching data protection laws and how they’re applied to personal data processing activities in the public sector.
  2. I wanted to learn about how qualitative data are used and managed in health and social care research, as well as the issues that may arise from this.
  3. It was clear that collaboration was at the project’s core from the very beginning and I wished to be part of a co-created project between academics and PPI contributors.

Looking back, I can confidently say that my time with the Q-DaPS team has definitely exceeded those expectations.

 

Working with the research team

Throughout my placement, I met and worked with various members of the Q-DaPS team: Professor Fiona Stevenson (who was my placement host), Professor Geraldine Leydon, Dr Barbara Caddick, Dr Karen Lloyd, and patient and public involvement (PPI) experts Lynn Laidlaw and Ali Percy.

PPI increasingly plays a central part of health and social care research. Safe to say, I had never worked with PPI contributors before. That, mixed with the readings I’ve done in a discipline I’d never come across before, would explain why I came to the first full team meeting with a page full of questions: from “how does triangulation work?” to “how do PPI contributors get onboarded on research projects like this?”. I knew that delving into a whole new discipline was going to be a challenge, so I’m thankful to the Q-DaPS team for actively  involving me in their discussions and patiently explaining concepts and terminology that I couldn’t get my head around.

Another in2research student, Kim McBride, also joined the Q-DaPS team later that summer. Even though we didn’t start our placements at the same time, we got to work together on days when our schedules overlapped. In retrospect, it was probably for the best—every time we were in the same room together we always ended up chatting about our studies and research interests. I really enjoyed working with Kim; like the rest of the Q-DaPS team, her contributions were informed by the work she’s done in her discipline (which is Social Psychology) and getting to see the same dataset (i.e., focus group transcripts) from her perspective was incredibly valuable.

 

Working on my project

The Q-DaPS project involved a qualitative multistakeholder study, which essentially means that there’s a lot of reading involved—especially in the earlier weeks of my placement. Before homing in on the focus group transcripts, I went through interview transcripts from the multistakeholder study, where I gained insights from various experts in the field (i.e., PPI contributors in health and social care research, researchers, and data protection lawyers).

Having gone through the focus group and interview transcripts, I ended up researching the intersections between UK data protection law and health data-related research ethics. I mainly focused on the UK GDPR as well as the Taipei and Helsinki Declarations. Through this placement, I got to explore the connections between them which I thoroughly enjoyed.

What made the research process enriching was the feedback phase; this is where the varied expertise of the Q-DaPS team shined. Looking back on the dialogue I developed with the Q-DaPS researchers through the ribbons of comments on my research outline, I have learned so much from their experiences—from how data protection laws are applied in academic settings to how data ethics are approached by ethics committees across institutions.

Even though I was based in the Department of Primary Care and Population Health, I got to meet researchers from other departments. From them, I learned more about topics like social prescribing, safety standards for baby food, and even health economics—things I’d never looked into before. Being able to hear about their research and share experiences and anecdotes with them really encouraged me to keep going with my project.

The chances of being onboarded onto a medical sociology research project with a CV filled with legal research experience are very slim, and I am very grateful to the in2research team for having afforded me this opportunity by matching me to the Q-DaPS placement. My gratitude is extended to the Q-DaPS team, who have warmly welcomed me into their side of the research world and enthusiastically encouraged my curiosity.

Humanitarianism – what does it mean today?

By e.schaessens, on 18 August 2023

Woman holding an IV drip bag.

On World Humanitarian Day, Dr James Smith, Lecturer and Co-Director of UCL’s MSc in Humanitarian Policy & Practice reflects on the evolution of the humanitarian landscape and some of its inherent challenges.

The United Nations have stressed that the number of people requiring immediate ‘humanitarian assistance and protection’ has never been greater than this year. In the absence of concerted action, the impact of violence, widespread lack of access to essential public services, and wilful political indifference and neglect will continue to generate catastrophic levels of human suffering and ecological damage.

If we define humanitarianism in its broadest sense as a belief in the equal value of human life and a concern for human welfare, then the need for some form of humanitarianism appears as urgent as ever.

At the same time, popularised expressions of humanitarianism have shifted and changed over time. Humanitarian values have been institutionalised and bureaucratised, and corresponding systems and sectors have formed and grown. Now-dominant forms of humanitarianism have histories and contemporary articulations that are intimately tied to capitalism, colonialism and whiteness. Relatedly, criticism of the humanitarian system and its interventions has increased exponentially in recent years, driven forward by scandals that detail abuses of power, the undignified treatment of people in vulnerable situations, and a failure to enact the radical changes needed to alter how financial support is generated and distributed, or the means by which communities can take control of their own decision-making.

The growing number of instructive critiques of humanitarian action should inspire us to identify new ways to teach, study, and enact humanitarian values. It is increasingly clear that existing institutions, systems, and processes need to change and adapt in order to practice an ethics of care and concern. At the same time, calls for transnational solidarity (consider, for example, the vibrant civil society movements that pressed for equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines), and global resource and knowledge sharing, are strong. The fundamental values that define humanitarianism can support and amplify these calls.

With UCL’s new MSc in Humanitarian Policy & Practice we are enthusiastic about working with students and professionals that are representative of the current and future global humanitarian workforce in order to think creatively and critically about humanitarian values and ethical and effective forms of humanitarian action. In doing so we will ensure students have the ability to develop programmes while continually interrogating foundational values, principles and motivations, and to design research studies while thinking critically about the politics of knowledge production, alongside several other priority topics.

By taking these steps we hope to contribute towards future humanitarianisms that enact a concern for our shared welfare in a way that is equity oriented, justice motivated, and solidarity driven.

Opinion piece: My experiences so far of hybrid working at the PCPH department

By guest blogger, on 4 October 2021

Dr Sarah Griffiths, Senior Research Fellow and Study Manager of
PriDem: Best practice in primary care led dementia support

In this blog, Sarah Griffiths discusses her experiences of beginning the hybrid working at the PCPH department.

Emily Spencer (Research assistant, PriDem) and I have started coming into the department for two days a week.  We have been together in the office twice so far and have seen benefits. Both being new to UCL, it has been an important step in starting to feel a sense of belonging to a department. I think being in-person for some of the time is enhancing the development of an effective working relationship. At the start of each week, we plan weekly goals and have started to prioritise tasks that would work best in-person for office days. Enjoying everyday conversation just for the sake of it, without this being a prelude to a meeting has been a novelty, and the potential for using bodily movement for ‘acting out’ anecdotes or being unaware of what our faces are doing, has created a much-missed sense of communicative freedom. Going for coffee together, airing thoughts as they occur and having spontaneous discussions (rather than having to compose them in an email or wait until the next Teams meeting), are all great benefits of hybrid working and breed creativity. It can also be easier to read and respond to people’s emotions when in person and there is nothing like a co-present giggle for enhancing well-being.

It is early days, and there haven’t been many people around in the department yet, but some chance meetings in the kitchen and corridor have led to spontaneous conversations with new people and a chance to connect with the wider team.

Before the pandemic I loved rare WFH days. To me they were luxury; a chance to switch off distractions and ‘get in the flow’, with all the benefits of being able to get washing done, cuddle the dog and eat whole packets of biscuits unobserved. However, since this became the norm, the enjoyment has gradually faded for me. I’m fortunate that I can find space to work, away from family members, and I don’t have children living at home. Even so, at times I’ve felt trapped by lack of variety. Like many people I’ve been super productive, but have often worked crazy hours, due to a lack of natural breaks to travel to/from work, and no escape from the ‘workplace’.

I live in Cornwall! It takes me three and a half hours to get to London and I’m lucky because I have accommodation when I am there. I am working out ways of working on a train when the internet is poor, saving tasks for travel times that don’t require online connection. Having a snooze and recharging my batteries has also been on my to-do list.  I have noticed that coming back to Cornwall after my London stint has led to appreciating and enjoying home working all over again.

However, there are issues to overcome to optimise the hybrid working experience, and everyone’s situation is unique. Although currently Emily and I have started fulfilling the UCL guidance of aiming for 40% embodiment, this guidance is somewhat ambiguous and has been variously interpreted. It will not be possible in the literal sense once recruitment starts. Our working practices will vary week to week, in terms of where we need to be and how we approach interactions. Some research activities will be in-person and some remote. However, the challenges of background noise and confidentiality mean remote activity will not necessarily work when carried out in a shared office. We are going to have to negotiate how we do this, building in flexibility and ensuring that we have the right equipment and office ventilation. Headphones and suitable microphones can help with confidentiality and researchers keeping their own vocal volume to a minimum, although many of our participants will have reduced hearing and/or find background noise highly distracting.  The current requirement to wear masks in shared offices adds to the challenge of video calls, especially as people living with dementia and those with hearing difficulties gain communication support from seeing people’s faces.

These challenges have led us discuss future arrangements for hybrid working within our team. The 40% embodiment guidance includes discussing individual circumstances with line managers. We hope that this can be highly flexible, with clearer guidance around managers using discretion and trust; monitoring how well research staff are engaging in remote versus in-person working. Importantly, this will entail balancing efficiency with wellbeing and maintaining a sense of belonging. Fatigue is one to keep an eye on as people return to the world of commuting. Depending on the person, the team and the tasks at hand, researchers may want to be embodied for a whole week at time, but then balance this with a week of working from home. I hope that we can continue this conversation about how we enter the new phase of hybrid working.

Developing educational leadership skills as an early career academic

By guest blogger, on 28 September 2021

By Megan Armstrong, on 24 September 2021

Dr Danielle Nimmons, GP and NIHR In-Practice Fellow

I am a GP, researcher and educationalist at UCL and I thought I would document some of the milestones in my early academic development. As part of my training I was fortunate to be awarded an NIHR Academic Clinical Fellowship (ACF), which has been an amazing opportunity to develop my research and teaching skills.

My research has included studies on frailty, dementia and Parkinson’s, for example conducting reviews. However, I knew at the start of my ACF that as well as research, I wanted to gain teaching experience and achieve outputs, such as accreditation as Fellow of the Higher Education Academy / HE Advance (FHEA). At UCL we are very fortunate to be encouraged to develop both research and educational skills. Below I outline the main teaching I was involved in, what I got out of it and suggestions/tips for others who may be interested in developing educational leadership skills as an early career academic.

Teaching experience at UCL

As a GP registrar in my 3rd year (ST3) I became a module lead for Preparation for Practice (PfP), part of the Year 4 MBBS programme. My roles included designing simulated patient cases for the students, direct teaching, supporting other GP tutors and administration staff, course evaluation and quality assurance. I also led the transition from face-to-face delivery to online as Covid hit, developing recorded (asynchronous) and live webinar (synchronous) material.

In my 4th year of training  (ST4) I decided to get experience of small group teaching in my GP practice as a Medicine in the Community (MIC) tutor, for two UCL medical students over the academic year. Students spent 10 days in my GP practice in total, and I got to see them improve clinically while I gained personal tutoring skills. Sessions included an interactive workshop on a disease /condition, formative assessment in the shape of MCQs, role play and patient interactions between students and my NHS patients who gave up their time to help.

What I got out of it

I love teaching and find it incredibly rewarding! The variety of teaching experiences helped break up my academic time and focus when working on different project. These experiences included:

  • Face to face teaching,
  • Online teaching,
  • Developing teaching material,
  • Evaluation teaching activities and
  • Quality assurance

These experiences also contributed to my successful fellowship applications and being awarded a UCL Excellence in Medical Education award (EMEA) (see here).

I was also fortunate to get some outputs, including presentations, awards and publications: Medical student mentoring programs: current insights and The UCL ‘Preparation for Practice’ teaching programme. 

Reflections

Balancing GP training (exams and completing my compulsory training portfolio), research and teaching can be challenging, at times I definitely felt like I was juggling many balls and just about managing not to drop any! The extra academic day in my 4th year helped but only because I taught less on the PfP programme, which gave me more time do practice based (MIC) teaching. Having boundaries and recognising when my plate was full also helped. For example, during my final GP (MRCGP) exams I tried not to do too much else.

Teaching was most enjoyable when I linked it to my research. This included selecting patients from under-represented groups for students to interact with in their GP teaching sessions, which complemented my clinical research project exploring how people from under-represented groups self-manage Parkinson’s disease. As my teaching was informed by the research I was doing, it also saved time when it came to lesson planning.

Finally, most of my academic time was during the pandemic and teaching not only helped me network with other academics within the department but also with hospital registrars doing acute medicine and acting as teaching fellows, academic pharmacists and academic clinicians from a range of specialties based at the medical school main campus.

Tips

Tips for other early career academics:

  1. Say ‘Yes’ to opportunities
  2. Recognise limitations; i.e., Time! It is impossible to do everything but you can make a real impact to programmes if you focus on a select few.
  3. Look for a variety of educational experiences. For example, online vs in person teaching, design teaching vs evaluation
  4. Try and get some outputs, e.g., presentations, higher education fellowships like the FHEA
  5. Link it to your research!
  6. Discuss with current ACFs and module leads to get an idea of what is best for you.

I would encourage all early career academics to gain teaching experience and hope this has inspired some to do so!

References

  1. Nimmons D, Hatter L, Davies N, Sampson EL, Walters K, Schrag A. Experiences of advance care planning in Parkinson’s disease and atypical parkinsonian disorders: a mixed methods systematic review. Eur J Neurol. 2020 Oct;27(10):1971-1987. doi: 10.1111/ene.14424. Epub 2020 Jul 30. PMID: 32603525.
  2. Nimmons D, Giny S, Rosenthal J. Medical student mentoring programs: current insights. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2019 Mar 4;10:113-123. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S154974. PMID: 30881173; PMCID: PMC6404673.
  3. Nimmons D, Jones MM. The UCL ‘Preparation for Practice’ teaching programme. Med Educ. 2020 Nov;54(11):1077-1078. doi: 10.1111/medu.14326. Epub 2020 Sep 3. PMID: 32885435.