Christmas and the holiday season at the end of the year are over. It has been a busy time – everything must be fixed and arranged for a few, intense days. However, for most people it has been a precious holiday with time together with the ones we love, as well as an opportunity for contemplation and reflection.

Just before Christmas, the K2 Leadership Team was in place. Besides myself, it will be:
– Deputy Leader: Eystein Husebye, M.D., Ph.D.
– Deputy Leader Research: Silke Appel, Ph.D.
– Deputy Leader Teaching: Jone Trovik, M.D., Ph.D.
– Deputy Leader Innovation: Emmet Mc Cormack, Ph.D.
– Administration Manager: Julie Stavnes, M.Ba.

Eystein Husebye is well known to most. He is a professor and consultant physician in endocrinology, leads the Research Group for Endocrine Medicine, and heads KG Jebsen-Center in Autoimmune Diseases. He has been a vice-chairman for several years, and has been acting leader, thus ensuring continuity in the Leadership Team.

Silke Appel is professor, Group Leader at Broegelmann Research Laboratory and Head of the Core Center for Flow Cytometry. She is also a member of the Department Council.

Jone Trovik is a professor, consultant physician in gynecology and obstetrics, and belongs to the Research Group for Gynecological Cancer. She has been Acting Leader at K2 this fall, and before that, she was Deputy Leader for Education.

Emmet Mc Cormack is a professor and leader of galenic pharmacy. In addition, he has experience with regard to the establishment and operation of research-based companies.

Julie Stavnes is also well known. She is MBA from NHH, and has been Administration Manager at K2 since 2015.

I take this opportunity to thank them for being willing to spend time and effort for K2. The team extends widely academically, involving both physicians and non-physicians, including pharmacy, which is an example of the many non-medical education subjects. Furthermore, we have introduced a Deputy Leader for Innovation since there is currently a focus on innovation, as well to match this focus at the faculty level. I welcome you all to the Leadership Team, and am looking forward to working with you and the Management Team of K2 in the years to come!

Pål

Hi! 2017 is soon history. Christmas is approaching – a holiday that for many is the highlight of the year – followed by some peaceful days, then New Year’s Eve, the New Year’s Concert and the traditional German-Austrian Ski Jumping Week before a new year is embarking.

As most people probably know, I am the new Head of Department of Clinical Science (K2) after Per Bakke. Since not everybody knows me: I was educated MD 1986 and PhD 1989 at UiB, is consultant physician in Endocrinology and Metabolic Diseases at the Department of Pediatics and Adoolescents, and has been Professor of Pediatrics from 2000. I have international experience from three research years at the University of Chicago, Harvard Medical School, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, respectively. I have built up the research group in diabetes genetics and lead the KG Jebsen Center for Diabetes Research.

Why K2? Yes, that is a big jump. The motivation for applying for the job as Head of Department was a wish for new challenges at a great institute with a lot of positive energy. Here are top research groups, EU projects, Jebsen Centers, a new study plan in medicine under implementation, and a budget in balance. What scares me is that it is indeed jumping after Wirkola (Norwegian ski jumper legend). Per Bakke and the team around him have really done a great job at K2. Then it is an extra motivation to see if it is possible to bring K2 even further in the field of research and teaching. The Swede ski jumper Boklöv challenged the jump sport with a new way to jump; it is always possible to do something good even better. I believe in inspiration, involvement, internationalization, and innovation. My mother usually says “cleaver people are needed everywhere” – everyone can do an important job for K2 even though the roles are different. One challenge is therefore to work together to make each other even better. Let 1 + 1 be 3 and not 2. But we should also applaud for those that jump the longest and most stylish. We need role models, we need top research, we need top educators, and we always need new ideas.

Finally, I would like to thank you for your warm welcome at the Institute’s day. I would also like to thank the administration for extra efforts during the time that has been, as well as Eystein Husebye, Jone Trovik and Roland Jonsson who have been willing to be instituted department leaders. I wish to thank each of you for working hard for K2 during 2017.

I am looking forward to getting to know K2 better and taking on this exciting task. Wishing you a peaceful Christmas and everything good for 2018.

Pål

How is the situation regarding sexual harassment at our department?

Our very own university rector was very bold stating to the press “no he did not know any such incidents”, but soon had to correct and confirm that this issue had led to the termination of a UiB professorship, and that ten other cases were registered.

Not surprising. What characterizes an environment with increased risk of sexual harassment: gender inequality and power imbalance, as well as temporary working conditions. Anyone who recognizes this? Male Professors / Leaders / Teachers and Female Fellows / Subordinates / Students, adding a significant age difference between groups; this is us!

Sadly, we are in “good” company: search for university and sexual harassment, and there are several reports from universities in both Europe and the United States. The Guardian characterized this as “at epidemic levels” in March 2017.

What is considered sexual harassment? In general, harassment is defined as repeated unwanted actions over time, or a single serious act. Sexual harassment can range from sexual commentaries / whistling or “pawing” to sexual advances / suggestions to psychologic / physical pressure to achieve sexual “favors”. In an asymmetric working relationship, where a subordinate is dependent specifically on the superior (such as a mentor), she is vulnerable. As a general, a superior has a special responsibility to “keep his path clean”, but as colleagues, we also have a responsibility to speak out if witnessing unwanted behavior! Every one of us should contribute to a culture where harassing comments / actions are not accepted.

What to do if unwanted situations occur? Report! – primarily to your nearest leader, but if this is difficult, please contact a different superior or the formal human safety representative (“verneombud”) for formal inquiries, alternatively the union representative or the corporate health service for more informal advice / assistance. The University’s staff manual provides the following advice in case of harassment: make your own notes of what happened, time and place, and how you reacted. From 1.1.2018, students will have a specific report service at UiB: “Sifra”.

Even though we tend to find the difficulties and possible negative aspects of the now implemented regulations limiting temporary employments, such job protection will help shift the asymmetry / power imbalance in working conditions in the right direction. If this reduces the risk of sexual harassment, it must be regarded as an added benefit.

Jone

Committees from various funding sources (Research Council of Norway, Norwegian Cancer Society, etc.) have spent the autumn analyzing applications and CVs to seal out the around ten percent they think should be funded. The results from the Research Council of Norway’s program FRIMEDBIO show that the new committee established during summer 2017 has not found research at K2 worthy of being funded. In reality, success rates were poor from the Research Council of Norway this year.

So, what about getting on the other side of the fence? For the Research Council of Norway, you need to be invited to sit in the committee, but EU’s Horizon2020 program encourages researchers to register in the expert database. They are looking for two things: high expertise in relevant research field, and that you are available for random short-term assignments. The European Commission considers several factors when choosing evaluators for a call. In addition to scientific qualifications, gender and geographical spread are important factors.

There are many advantages of being an evaluator. You will get direct insight into the process and gain experience with the evaluation process. You will get the opportunity to read several proposals, both good and bad, and will learn which level is expected and what to avoid. This experience is useful when writing proposals for national announcements, which, to an ever-increasing degree, copy EU announcements.

Instead of providing you with a detailed description of the registration process, I have reserved 19 December and 10 January to assist you. You are welcome to come by my office, or invite me over.

Amra

The Norwegian Research Council, along with the EU commission, have been strong advocates for open access to published research, open sharing of research data, and for expansion of the current infrastructure for research and data sharing, known as “Open Science”.

Open Science represents an approach to research that is collaborative, transparent, and accessible, and comes with a range of criteria: Scientists are encouraged and expected to publish in open access journals or science archives, to engage in public debates on research matters, to be involved in larger research collaborations, and to help establish open research practices.

The framework around these criteria can be utilized in various performance evaluation systems, both on an individual and an institutional level. They are meant to be adapted to different career levels. Entry-level scientists can be rewarded for learning about Open Science activities, whereas senior scientists can be rewarded for initiating and participating in such activities, for support or mentoring activities, or for contributing to the development of institutional practices.

To aid the implementation of Open Science, the EU commission has launched the Open Science Monitor, providing a way to assess developments and trends in open science activities. The initiative monitors several indicators to assess open access to publications, data sharing and academic communication. As the Norwegian government has decided that all publications receiving public grants shall be open to everyone by 2024, I strongly advise everyone to use this resource to keep an eye on what’s happening in Open Science.

Roland Jonsson
Acting Head

If you have concerns you should definitely familiarize yourself with the Health Research Act (Act on medical and health research). This act was approved in 2008 (1 July 2009), and was more recently updated in 2017. Below you will find a short introduction to the act.

§2 defines the aim with medical and health research as research on human beings, human biologic material and health related information. In addition, the act is applicable for pilot studies and exploring treatments. The act also defines the geographical area where research is conducted (in § 3), and relates to Norwegian territory or when research is conducted under the leadership of Norwegian scientists.

§4 involves who is the responsible institution and normally this is the place where the responsible scientist is employed. In addition, we get a definition of the project leader as a person who should have the competence both to topic and science for a responsible performance. The supervisor is normally the project leader and should then have a PhD or corresponding merits.

The project leader has the responsibility for the daily conduct of the project and should oversee: that ethical, health related, scientific and individual concerns are taken; that the institution is informed before the project is started; that applicable ethical approval from REK is at hand; that the project is conducted according to the original plan; as well as appropriate communications to public institutions have been done.

Who must apply at REK? All who conduct research with an aim of novel knowledge about health and disease.

Who does not need to apply? Activities concerned with quality assurance. In addition, there are borderline areas, for example health service research, explorative treatments and methodological developments.

If you have questions/concerns? Use the application template “Remit Assessment”.  By this you will get a quick response from REK.

And please note – you will never obtain ethical approval after a project has been started!

How do I apply? You find the Web portal here.  There is full electronic handling of applications.  The decision is sent to the responsible institution. There are different forms for remit assessment, project application, project amendments, and reports.

If you still have questions and concerns – contact the administration at REK. You find them in the second floor of Armauer Hansen Building.

Roland
Acting Head

This originates from an American film (1985), hosting Madonna in her first major screen role. The title was an announcement in the personal column of a newspaper (pre-internet).

What if you did not know if it was Susan you were seeking? Actually it was Stephanie! The REAL story (2017) takes place in Europe; A Basque neuroscience professor is looking for a collaborator skilled in neuro-genetics, rat models and brain investigations. How to find her? Era-net Neuron has issued a trans-national call, advertising 1 million Euro. Where to seek? On the Internet of course, and the UiB web-pages (which our Vice Dean of Innovation Helge Raeder wisely has nudged all research group leaders to actively update) and there he found her; his very Stephanie (Le Hellar), with a perfect scientific match. And so the grant was awarded them! Congratulations Stephanie! And for the rest of us; go home and update your personal UiB web page. Perhaps the scientist of your dreams is out there, waiting for your specific qualifications?!

And if you are desperately seeking dissemination assistance the brand new UiB « Lab of Learning and Dissemination» has just opened in Media City Bergen. They are eager and ready, with highly skilled personnel combining pedagogy and technology; journalism, photography, graphics, TV-productions, wanting to help just YOU! If you need assistance in producing a video to use while teaching (first priority) or research dissemination, they want to enable you to master this yourself. They have a “first-aid-kit” to lend for free, transforming your own cell phone into a capable recorder, and simple (to use) editing programs for you to transform the “take” into a proper video.

The goal should be that each teacher produces one short clinical video-clip for the students to see (and then practice the skill) because this is the OSCE-exercise she/he will organize for the coming spring OSCE. But sooner; coming Wednesday 8th of November is the autumn OSCE which many of us will contribute to. Good luck to you all; both the OSCE-general Ketil Grong, all his good helpers and all the students being tested.

With the arrival of fall comes our annual meeting point; the department day. This year we have chosen to change the name and some of the content. In addition to being our annual HSE-meeting, we will focus on the department’s internal life, as well as the work processes our former department management started this spring. We have invited the faculty to present a status on the evaluation of the reorganization from 2013, as well as the new law for state employees. And we will, most likely, hear from our new head of department and the new plans and expectations he or she has for us. This year we would very much like to make time for some drinks and a chat in Café Christie. Perhaps this will be your opportunity to have a talk with our new head of department or a colleague you haven’t seen in a while. I hope as many as possible will attend both the gathering and the following mingling. Link to registration form here.

With the fall comes another possibility for communication; the annual employee appraisal talk
*(the abbreviation works so much better in Norwegian). All employees, regardless of duration or percentage of employment, is to be offered appraisal talks from his or her immediate leader. In the following days, I myself will invite the administration for their annuals talks. All group leaders will be sent an overview of the employees in their groups, for whom they are responsible to offer an appraisal talk. In order to avoid nag from me, I suggest you start organizing the remaining talks already now. Please do not hesitate to get in touch if you have any uncertainties or questions.

I look forward to seeing you all in the Aula in November.

All the best, Julie

Somewhat unfamiliar? This novel was released in 1986, with a Norwegian translation in 1987. The author Kazuo Ishiguro was awarded the Nobel prize of literature for 2017. The plot is set in the author’s country of birth Japan, and this is the connection with this editorial: the University of Bergen’s strategic partnership with Japanese research organizations. Together with NTNU and Innovation Norway, UiB have joined forces to approach potential Japanese collaborators in relation to research and innovation. During spring 2017 former Dean Langeland headed a delegation visiting Tokyo and Kyoto, where themes discussed spanned from stem cell research to geriatric medicine.

Japan is well known for technology (and labor effort). Do you have ideas/thoughts related to your research that may profit by Japanese industrial cooperation? Our Vice Dean of Innovation, Helge Raeder, is eager to convey ideas/contact/collaboration. A new Japanese visit is planned for spring 2018. Perhaps you should be joining?

Speaking of innovation and future research: Horizon 2020 hosts a kick-off seminar the 31st of October. Please sign up! Both the Head of Bergen University as well as “our” Dean Bakke is eager to encourage researchers to apply for international research funds. The institute has research advisors for helping you during such application processes; make use of them!

Another action point from the University leadership is increased digitalization: how may this be used to save resources? Are there tasks in your everyday work life better handled by a computer than by manual labor? I am unsure if the hospital’s speech recognition program is a very good example, but the principle is illustrative: instead of secretaries writing the doctors’ notes, the dictates are transcribed by a computer. And thanks to machine learning (!), the writings turn out as (a little) more understandable for every note I make. But in the beginning, there were a lot of absolutely incomprehensible phrases written in the patient files; almost as if one should be “An artist of the floating world”.

Jone

To follow-up the literary references: the title is from a play by Ludvig Holberg. This was also the title winning the Holberg high-school competition some years ago, a project dealing with fraud.

At the last meeting in the committee of extended research management, research fraud was pointed at as one focus area. We should strive to be attentive to this ethical aspect when planning, conducting and presenting our research.

Forging results we all acknowledge as fraud, but there are several more subtle areas where our ethical consciousness might be stretched to benefit ourselves. What about the tendency of selective citation of references; those supporting our own hypothesis are preferred to those disagreeing. Selective publishing is another; it is somehow more convenient to publish positive (meaning: statistical significant) results than those without differences. And what if the interesting (and significant) results from the former study of the newest promising biomarker could not be validated in the following study? We do however have a moral responsibility to publicly present our conducted research, both for the sake of those providing research funding and participating patients contributing with biologic samples/clinical data, as well as to not introduce new treatment algorithms prematurely. “The Invisible” (meaning unpublished) studies may in effect be one form of fraud.

And do we follow the Vancouver treaty? Holding the title as research group leader or head of clinical department, is that equivalent to actually plan, conduct, analyse and write every paper from the group/department? Or should some of these stated as authors in reality be the Invisible?

I would like to remind you all of the OSCE exam 8th of November; those not already having stated who will contribute: please do so to Ketil Grong (he is in need of more qualified helpers).

The Day of the Institute (K2) will be hosted the 29th of November. We do hope our new Head of Institute will be formally appointed at that time, and will actively contribute by presenting the upcoming visions for our Department of Clinical Science.

Jone

The office situation at K2 is a challenge. A large project activity has contributed to an increased demand for office space and working places for phd-students. The administration needs your help in order to know of changes in demand and supply of working places in K2 areas in the lab building. Please remember that your need for office space is to be reported to Irene: Irene.Hjelmaas@uib.no

In the allocation of seats, we will follow the already decided ranking for allocation of office spaces: Professor, Associate Professor, researcher, postdoc, PhD student, research line student, master students. In addition, we will strive to have people sit near their labs and close to their partners. It is possible that we also need to utilize some lab areas as office spaces.

We have recently been given access to some great, new offices in the fifth floor in BUS. These offices are provided in order to relieve the pressure on office places in the Lab-building for researchers and post-docs. The offices are newly furnished with adjustable desks and room for 2-3 people per office. Anyone interested in the new offices can contact Irene or myself.

Now to something completely different; Horizon2020 is about to embark on the last three years of its’ existence with a bigger budget than ever. On that occasion, the Division of Research Management at UiB and the Research Council of Norway arrange a Kick-off meeting. Please see the separate post further down in this week’s news letter for details.

Best regards,

Julie

In the new curriculum for the medical students at our faculty, Medicine 2015, it has been decided that what is referred to as OSCE examinations (O = objective; S = structured; C = clinical; E = examination) should be introduced and included. One of the main arguments for this is to secure a fairer evaluation and grading compared to the current clinical examinations. There are arguments both pro and con. However, we all must relate to this decision and make sure that these examinations are performed in a proper manner. The first ordinary OSCE examination will be on June 20th, 2018 for 160 medical students. The OSCE exam is a station-based exam (“circle exercise”), and all students are examined at all stations.

As announced since April/May, the fourth and last pilot-OSCE examination will be on Wednesday November 8th (in about one month). The pilot medical students to be examined this time are from Class 14-B. They have been medical students for about 3½ years by now. Altogether, 39 examiners are needed to run three parallel circles with 13 different active stations. Examiners from Departments of Biomedicine, Clinical Medcine, Clinical Science and Global Public Health and Primary Care will be more or less involved as examiners. There will be electronic and online assessment with laptop at each station.

This is an example of the checklist for the examination in one of the stations used in the pilot examination in May this year:

This example is related to the teaching in neurophysiology at the Departments of Biomedicine. The “objectivity” is secured by evaluating all candidates and issuing points on each single question/element in the checklist. A global score (totalvurdering) is the examiner’s overall and general judgement and impression of the candidate’s performance, independent of points actually obtained.

By a Single borderline score regression analysis, the global evaluation (Not passed, Borderline, Sufficient, Good, Excellent) is plotted on the x-axis vs. the points scored for every student (in this example 68) on the y-axis. If a score of > 40% of the points is preset as the limit for passing this station, 6 students have failed. In this example, the regression analysis will adjust the limit to ~ 60%, and 12 students will fail. The borderline regression analysis corrects for an easy station where many students obtain high scores and a more difficult task/station where many students obtain a low score.

This pilot OSCE examination will commence at. 08:00 a.m. on November 8th, and is finished by lunchtime.

Ketil Grong