www.elsevier.com Open in urlscan Pro
185.64.255.1  Public Scan

Form analysis
1 forms found in the DOM

GET https://www.elsevier.com/search-results

<form method="get" autocomplete="off" role="search" action="https://www.elsevier.com/search-results" data-aa-region="Header Search">
  <div class="big-search-term">
    <label for="big-search-term-input">Search <span>by keyword, title, subject area</span></label>
    <div class="big-search-term-controls">
      <input id="big-search-term-input" type="search" name="query" class="big-search-term-input">
      <button type="button" title="Clear search" class="big-search-clear-search hide">
        <svg width="16" height="16" viewBox="0 0 357 357" aria-hidden="true" focusable="false">
          <polygon points="357,35.7 321.3,0 178.5,142.8 35.7,0 0,35.7 142.8,178.5 0,321.3 35.7,357 178.5,214.2 321.3,357 357,321.3 214.2,178.5"></polygon>
        </svg>
      </button>
      <button type="submit" title="Search" class="big-search-submit">
        <svg width="30" height="30" viewBox="12 8 55 60" preserveAspectRatio="xMinYMax meet" aria-hidden="true" focusable="false">
          <path
            d="M65.6 62L52 48.4c2.9-3.7 4.5-8.2 4.5-13 0-5.6-2.2-10.9-6.2-14.9s-9.3-6.2-14.9-6.2-10.9 2.2-14.9 6.2-6.2 9.3-6.2 14.9 2.2 10.9 6.2 14.9 9.3 6.2 14.9 6.2c4.8 0 9.3-1.6 13-4.5L62 65.6l3.6-3.6zM24.1 46.7c-3-3-4.7-7-4.7-11.3 0-4.3 1.7-8.3 4.7-11.3s7-4.7 11.3-4.7c4.3 0 8.3 1.7 11.3 4.7s4.7 7 4.7 11.3c0 4.3-1.7 8.3-4.7 11.3s-7 4.7-11.3 4.7c-4.3 0-8.3-1.7-11.3-4.7z">
          </path>
        </svg>
      </button>
    </div>
  </div>
</form>

Text Content

Skip to content

 * About Elsevier
    * About us
    * Elsevier Connect
    * Careers
    * Open Science

 * Products & Solutions
    * R & D Solutions
    * Clinical Solutions
    * Research Platforms
    * Research Intelligence
    * Education
    * All Solutions

 * Services
    * Authors
    * Editors
    * Reviewers
    * Librarians
    * Strategic Partners
    * Open Access
    * Societies

 * Shop & Discover
    * Books and Journals
    * Author Webshop (Opens new window)

 * Search Search
 * View Cart
   0
 * 
 *  * 
    * 
   
   View account Sign out

 * Sign in to view your account details and order history
   
   Sign in
    * 
    * View account Sign out
   
    * About Elsevier
      * About us
      * Elsevier Connect
      * Careers
      * Open Science
    * Products & Solutions
      * R & D Solutions
      * Clinical Solutions
      * Research Platforms
      * Research Intelligence
      * Education
      * All Solutions
    * Services
      * Authors
      * Editors
      * Reviewers
      * Librarians
      * Strategic Partners
      * Open Access
      * Societies
    * Shop & Discover
      * Books and Journals
      * Author Webshop (Opens new window)

Search by keyword, title, subject area

Elsevier Connect
View by community or topic
Community
Topic
Communities
Authors’ Update
Stories keeping journal authors in touch with industry developments, support and
training
Editors’ Update
Industry developments, policies and initiatives of interest to our journal
editors and editorial board members
Reviewers’ Update
Information for reviewers about relevant Elsevier and industry developments,
support and training
Library Connect
Partnering with the Librarian community
Societies' Update
News and information for societies
Atlas
Showcasing research from Elsevier journals that impact people's lives
Healthcare Professionals
Thought leadership for health professionals invested in the future of healthcare
Topics

Data & Analytics

Gender & Diversity

Healthcare & Medicine

Innovation

Insights

Librarian Community

Open Science

Research Intelligence

Research Community

Sustainability

Your Career

 1. Home
 2. Elsevier Connect
 3. Authors' Update
 4. Breaking down barriers: perspectives on why good research communication is a
    must




BREAKING DOWN BARRIERS: PERSPECTIVES ON WHY GOOD RESEARCH COMMUNICATION IS A
MUST

A researcher, healthcare professional, and charity CEO share their views

By Cherie Millar, John Moore and Tom Nutt - September 30, 2021  5 mins
© istockphoto.com/filo


FOLLOWING RECENT DISCUSSION ON GETTING GREATER IMPACT FOR YOUR WORK VIA TOOLS
SUCH AS THE LAY SUMMARY AND VISUAL/GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT, IN THIS ARTICLE WE
PRESENT INSIGHTS FROM THREE STAKEHOLDERS IN THE WIDER RESEARCH COMMUNITY. CHERIE
MILLAR, RESEARCHER AND CLINICAL SCIENTIST; JOHN MOORE, CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGIST
WORKING IN A TEACHING HOSPITAL; AND TOM NUTT, CEO OF THE CHARITY MENINGITIS NOW
SHARE THEIR VIEWS ON WHY GOOD RESEARCH COMMUNICATION IS VITAL – AND WHY WE STILL
HAVE SOME WAY TO GO BEFORE WE CAN CONSIDER OURSELVES FULLY FLUENT IN THIS
REGARD.

CHERIE, JOHN AND TOM WERE INTERVIEWED BY CHRISTOPHER TANCOCK

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


CHERIE MILLAR, ULSTER UNIVERSITY & NORTHERN IRELAND PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY,
BELFAST CITY HOSPITAL

> If this work just sits in a journal and goes no further, that's a shame: it
> could do so much more.



“Getting your work published in a journal with a high Impact Factor is a great
achievement, but what happens next? Impact Factors, citations and downloads are
just part of the picture here. There is lots of work published which could
practically impact on patient care but which, even if published open access, is
often “invisible” or incomprehensible to a wider audience. If this work just
sits in a journal and goes no further, that's a shame: it could do so much more.

There are ways in which the work could be better highlighted, and authors,
editors and publishers need to work together better to drive a bigger impact.
Devices such as lay summaries and visual abstracts could really help patients
and multidisciplinary teams to get more out of the research. There is some good
work being done and several great resources to help researchers, for example
Elsevier’s Researcher Academy, but at the same time there is a lack of
standardisation which leads to a mixed experience for the end user. Too many
journals still don’t publish lay summaries for one thing and where visual
abstracts are produced, they often vary considerably in terms of content and
quality.

At the same time, researchers have to be careful not to oversell or leave their
work open to misinterpretation. It is important that any patient/lay audience
components are properly reviewed – these things need editorial oversight. There
has to be a responsibility that the message conveyed is accurate and not
misleading. Researchers must also be clear about any negatives too – a balanced
approach is what’s needed.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


JOHN MOORE, BELFAST CITY HOSPITAL

> We don't all have to learn Esperanto to communicate better but we have to do
> something!

“It’s really important that multiple stakeholders can understand even complex
issues. In my experience, patients, carers and families are very savvy. If
research is presented properly and clearly, they will be able to understand the
importance of new findings and correctly interpret the conclusions of studies.

But it’s not just about the obvious stakeholders. Good, accessible research
communication also benefits the wider multidisciplinary team. For any one
patient, there might be up to 10-12 different healthcare professionals all
needing to collaborate in order to define and manage a good treatment regime for
the patient. We therefore have to communicate our particular science across the
spectrum to other healthcare professionals.

There is an expectation that everyone understands everything, but this is not
the case: we can’t all be experts in each other’s work. We therefore have to
modify our language to ensure comprehension. When I do this, I think of BBC
Radio 4 – I anticipate that my audience is probably much cleverer than I am, but
I also recognise that they are not experts. It’s that sort of thinking that you
need to adopt when drafting patient and public-facing information. We don't all
have to learn Esperanto to communicate better but we have to do something!”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


TOM NUTT, CEO MENINGITIS NOW

> We need to persuade the funding bodies supporting the research to consider
> patient engagement and the comprehensibility issue.

“In my experience, patients, carers and their families will often rely on
patient organisations like Meningitis Now to act in a sort of mediating role
between them and the world of scientific research. We are seen partly as
oracles, channelling and interpreting the messages we receive from research and
partly as validators – if we give our “seal of approval” to a piece of research
by promoting and commenting on it, then our stakeholders are likely to trust it.

There is a responsibility on charity/healthcare organisations to convey this
information. It is a delicate operation however: the problem is that end users
don't necessarily get the right or the fullest picture.

Ideally, we need to persuade the funding bodies supporting the research to
consider patient engagement and the comprehensibility issue. And this includes
medical research charities who often fund research. Doing so would complete the
circle and bring an understanding of the research back to the general public
which has often played a part in ultimately funding the research work itself. In
my view, this could help drive the adoption of good research communication
devices such as lay summaries and visual abstracts – and journals (and their
authors) would have to embrace these elements in order to attract funding. It
could also serve to broaden their readership too.”

Contributors

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Written by


CHERIE MILLAR

Written by


CHERIE MILLAR



Cherie is a Clinical Scientist in Clinical Microbiology at the Northern Ireland
Public Health Laboratory, Belfast City Hospital and Visiting Professor in the
School of Biomedical Sciences, Ulster University and Visiting Professor in
Research, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen’s
University of Belfast. She currently serves on the Editorial Board of the
International Journal of Mycobacteriology. She has published over 350 scientific
research articles in the area of clinical microbiology namely relating to
infective endocarditis, meningococcal disease, antibiotic resistance, cystic
fibrosis infection prevention and the readability of lay-facing healthcare
literature. Cherie actively embeds scientific communication into her teaching
practice to ensure that students develop these skills early in their research
and healthcare-related careers to ensure that graduates have acquired the skills
to communicate research to a varied stakeholder audience.



LinkedIn
Written by


JOHN MOORE

Written by


JOHN MOORE



John is a Clinical Microbiologist in the Northern Ireland Public Health
Laboratory, Belfast City Hospital and Honorary Professor of Clinical
Microbiology, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen’s
University of Belfast. He currently serves on the Editorial Board of the Ulster
Medical Journal and the International Journal of Mycobacteriology, as well as
serving previously on the Editorial Board of the British Journal of Biomedical
Science and Clinical Microbiology & Infection. He has a keen interest in
supporting patient and server user understanding of research and has served on
the Advisory Board of the Patient & Client Council, Northern Ireland’s statutory
health watchdog.



LinkedIn
Written by


TOM NUTT

Written by


TOM NUTT



Dr. Tom Nutt is CEO of UK-wide charity Meningitis Now. Prior to that, he worked
in health and care policy and was an academic historian at the University of
Cambridge, where he researched and lectured on welfare and population history.



LinkedIn

Research insight


GRAD SCHOOL BOOTCAMP FOR ENGINEERS

Chris Cogswell, PhD

November 10, 2021 A few minutes

Research insight


HOW A NEW DESIGN CAN HELP THE EMERGENCE OF REGENERATIVE MEDICINE

Andrea White

November 5, 2021 A few minutes

Interview


OUR EXPERIENCE WITH LAY SUMMARIES: AN INTERVIEW WITH THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF
KIDNEY DISEASES

Alina Foo and Christopher Tancock

November 4, 2021 5 mins

Comments

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. comments
powered by Disqus


 * Solutions
   
    * Scopus
    * ScienceDirect
    * Mendeley
    * Evolve
    * Knovel
    * Reaxys
    * ClinicalKey

 * Researchers
   
    * Submit your paper
    * Find books & journals
    * Visit Author Hub
    * Visit Editor Hub
    * Visit Librarian Hub
    * Visit Reviewer Hub

 * Subjects
   
    * Health
    * Life Sciences
    * Physical sciences & engineering
    * Social sciences & humanities

 * About Elsevier
   
    * About
    * Careers
    * Newsroom
    * Events
    * Publisher relations
    * Advertising, reprints and supplements

 * How can we help?
   
    * Support and Contact

 * Select location/language
   Global - English

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Copyright © 2021 Elsevier, except certain content provided by third parties

Cookies are used by this site. Cookie Settings

Terms and Conditions Privacy Policy Cookie Notice Sitemap




Elsevier.com visitor survey

We are always looking for ways to improve customer experience on Elsevier.com.
We would like to ask you for a moment of your time to fill in a short
questionnaire, at the end of your visit.

If you decide to participate, a new browser tab will open so you can complete
the survey after you have completed your visit to this website.

Thanks in advance for your time.

Accept Decline


We use cookies to analyse and improve our service, to improve and personalise
content, advertising and your digital experience. We also share information
about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics
partners. Cookie Policy

Cookie Settings Accept all cookies