Welcome to WIRE (Wolverhampton Intellectual Repository and E-Theses)

WIRE is the digital repository of research work by academic staff and students at the University of Wolverhampton. 


If you are a researcher at the University and want to submit your work to WIRE, please refer to the guides on the left. 


If you want to find research from the University of Wolverhampton, use the Search box ior the Browse function on the left. Please refer to the Quick Guides or Wire Help for advice on searching. 

For further information or help, contact wire@wlv.ac.uk



  • Sign language interpreter aptitude: The trials and tribulations of a longitudinal study

    Stone, Christopher (2017-01-01)
    This paper discusses the process of undertaking an exploratory longitudinal study of language learning and interpreter aptitude. It discusses the context of aptitude testing, the test selection for a test battery, the recruitment of subjects within the small-scale study (n=22) and the administration of that battery within the context of whether longitudinal studies are feasible with small cohorts of sign language interpreters. Sign languages continue to be languages of limited diffusion in Europe. Even with gradually increasing numbers of ‘hearing’ sign language users, typically those wishing to become sign language interpreters do not have high levels of sign language fluency prior to enrolling in sign language interpreter training. As such, these students need to gain fluency in sign language, whilst also beginning to engage in interpreter education and interpreting-skills development. To date there is little understanding of how best to screen sign language interpreter program applicants to ensure the effective use of resources, i.e. to educate those who will both learn sign language to C1 fluency (Pro-signs, 2016) during the BA and also be able to learn how to interpret. Longitudinal studies enable us to take a longer view of learning and the professionalisation of skills and knowledge. They do, however, require significant time and this in itself can prove to be an obstacle when university researchers are required to produce tangible research outputs for career goals such as promotion or tenure.
  • The use of in-class debates as a teaching strategy in increasing students’ critical thinking and collaborative learning skills in higher education.

    Brown, Zeta (BESA, 2015-01-01)
    This paper will explore the use of debates as an in-class teaching strategy that has the potential to heighten students’ critical thinking and collaborative learning skills. Students undertaking a childhood studies degree had weekly debates that linked media represented topics to theoretical content from their current module. This module covered a range of theoretical and practical perspectives in relation to the child, family and society. Therefore, the topics of weekly debates included the changing nature of childhood, the diversity of family relationships, childhood obesity and the differing ways in which children are socialised. Data was collected using a card-sort and in-class structured interview questions. The study focused on accessing students’ perspectives on the use of these weekly debates. The study found most students held differing, complex perspectives on either the benefit of enhancing collaborative learning or critical thinking skills. The findings suggest that fourteen of the sixteen students in this study did not prefer the use of debates in comparison to other teaching strategies. This is because some students sought more structure in the use of in-class debates to enhance their theoretical understanding. This paper concludes by considering recommendations for the module that include the possibility of using peer-assessment to ensure full student participation.
  • Addition of Docetaxel to First-line Long-term Hormone Therapy in Prostate Cancer (STAMPEDE): Modelling to Estimate Long-term Survival, Quality-adjusted Survival, and Cost-effectiveness

    Woods, Beth S.; Sideris, Eleftherios; Sydes, Matthew R.; Gannon, Melissa R.; Parmar, Mahesh K.B.; Alzouebi, Mymoona; Attard, Gerhardt; Birtle, Alison J.; Brock, Susannah; Cathomas, Richard; Chakraborti, Prabir R.; Cook, Audrey; Cross, William R.; Dearnaley, David P.; Gale, Joanna; Gibbs, Stephanie; Graham, John D.; Hughes, Robert; Jones, Rob J.; Laing, Robert; Mason, Malcolm D.; Matheson, David; McLaren, Duncan B.; Millman, Robin; O'Sullivan, Joe M.; Parikh, Omi; Parker, Christopher C.; Peedell, Clive; Protheroe, Andrew; Ritchie, Alastair W.S.; Robinson, Angus; Russell, J. Martin; Simms, Matthew S.; Srihari, Narayanan N.; Srinivasan, Rajaguru; Staffurth, John N.; Sundar, Santhanam; Thalmann, George N.; Tolan, Shaun; Tran, Anna T.H.; Tsang, David; Wagstaff, John; James, Nicholas D.; Sculpher, Mark J. (Elsevier, 2018-09-14)
    Background Results from large randomised controlled trials have shown that adding docetaxel to the standard of care (SOC) for men initiating hormone therapy for prostate cancer (PC) prolongs survival for those with metastatic disease and prolongs failure-free survival for those without. To date there has been no formal assessment of whether funding docetaxel in this setting represents an appropriate use of UK National Health Service (NHS) resources. Objective To assess whether administering docetaxel to men with PC starting long-term hormone therapy is cost-effective in a UK setting. Design, setting, and participants We modelled health outcomes and costs in the UK NHS using data collected within the STAMPEDE trial, which enrolled men with high-risk, locally advanced metastatic or recurrent PC starting first-line hormone therapy. Intervention SOC was hormone therapy for ≥2 yr and radiotherapy in some patients. Docetaxel (75 mg/m2) was administered alongside SOC for six three-weekly cycles. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis The model generated lifetime predictions of costs, changes in survival duration, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results and limitations The model predicted that docetaxel would extend survival (discounted quality-adjusted survival) by 0.89 yr (0.51) for metastatic PC and 0.78 yr (0.39) for nonmetastatic PC, and would be cost-effective in metastatic PC (ICER £5514/QALY vs SOC) and nonmetastatic PC (higher QALYs, lower costs vs SOC). Docetaxel remained cost-effective in nonmetastatic PC when the assumption of no survival advantage was modelled. Conclusions Docetaxel is cost-effective among patients with nonmetastatic and metastatic PC in a UK setting. Clinicians should consider whether the evidence is now sufficiently compelling to support docetaxel use in patients with nonmetastatic PC, as the opportunity to offer docetaxel at hormone therapy initiation will be missed for some patients by the time more mature survival data are available. Patient summary Starting docetaxel chemotherapy alongside hormone therapy represents a good use of UK National Health Service resources for patients with prostate cancer that is high risk or has spread to other parts of the body.
  • Short-Term Mating

    Bhogal, Manpal Singh; Hughes, Sara (Springer, 2017-03-01)
  • Tweeting links to academic articles

    Thelwall, M.; Tsou, A.; Weingart, S.; Haustein, S. (2013-01-01)
    Academic articles are now frequently tweeted and so Twitter seems to be a useful tool for scholars to use to help keep up with publications and discussions in their fields. Perhaps as a result of this, tweet counts are increasingly used by digital libraries and journal websites as indicators of an article's interest or impact. Nevertheless, it is not known whether tweets are typically positive, neutral or critical, or how articles are normally tweeted. These are problems for those wishing to tweet articles effectively and for those wishing to know whether tweet counts in digital libraries should be taken seriously. In response, a pilot study content analysis was conducted of 270 tweets linking to articles in four journals, four digital libraries and two DOI URLs, collected over a period of eight months in 2012. The vast majority of the tweets echoed an article title (42%) or a brief summary (41%). One reason for summarising an article seemed to be to translate it for a general audience. Few tweets explicitly praised an article and none were critical. Most tweets did not directly refer to the article author, but some did and others were clearly self-citations. In summary, tweets containing links to scholarly articles generally provide little more than publicity, and so whilst tweet counts may provide evidence of the popularity of an article, the contents of the tweets themselves are unlikely to give deep insights into scientists' reactions to publications, except perhaps in special cases.

View more