Melbourne Students & Learning - Research Publications

But where is the library ...?: Reframing the library at the University of Melbourne in a shared services environment

2019-02-09T06:50:15Z

But where is the library ...?: Reframing the library at the University of Melbourne in a shared services environment Chitty, Teresa; Ellis, Jenny Commencing in late 2013 and continuing through 2014, the University of Melbourne, a research-intensive and highly ranked Australian university, undertook an extensive review of all services, business processes and the required resourcing profile to deliver them. This review, known as the Business Improvement Program, ultimately led to a complete reconceptualization of the University’s operating model, the most significant in its 160 year history. The scale of the change was sweeping and the speed was audacious, resulting in the implementation of a new shared-services model across the University known as the Melbourne Operating Model. The entire University has been reorganized according to the principles of this operating model. The model has three core elements – Chancellery (responsible for leadership of overarching University strategy, policy, brand and capital); Academic Divisions (or Faculties and Schools), and University Services where the operational activities of the University are grouped together as shared services to support Academic Divisions (Faculties) to deliver on their teaching, research and engagement agendas. How did the Library fare? As a formal, visible organisational unit, the University Library ceased to exist. The University Librarian took on the mantle of University Librarian & Executive Director, Collections and was placed in Chancellery to provide strategic direction and policy oversight to the Library as well as to the University’s other cultural collections located in Faculties. However Library services, delivered by the two directorates of Scholarly Information and Research and Collections, were positioned as discrete operational units within the Academic Services division of University Services, so that both Directors (who formerly reported to the University Librarian), now report to the Executive Director for Academic Services. In this presentation the authors outline the background and rationale of the Business Improvement Program at the University of Melbourne and describe the current organisational structure under the Melbourne Operating Model. They present their personal views on how the Model has impacted the Library’s operational activities and priorities within the wider Academic Services context and describe how operational separation from the strategic leadership of the University Librarian position has been managed.

FGF receptor genes and breast cancer susceptibility: results from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium

2018-12-18T04:02:21Z

FGF receptor genes and breast cancer susceptibility: results from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium Agarwal, D.; Pineda, S.; Michailidou, K.; Herranz, J.; Pita, G.; Moreno, L. T.; Alonso, M. R.; Dennis, J.; Wang, Q.; Bolla, M. K.; Meyer, K. B.; Menendez-Rodriguez, P.; Hardisson, D.; Mendiola, M.; Gonzalez-Neira, A.; Lindblom, A.; Margolin, S.; Swerdlow, Background: Breast cancer is one of the most common malignancies in women. Genome-wide association studies have identified FGFR2 as a breast cancer susceptibility gene. Common variation in other fibroblast growth factor (FGF) receptors might also modify risk. We tested this hypothesis by studying genotyped single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and imputed SNPs in FGFR1, FGFR3, FGFR4 and FGFRL1 in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium.Methods: Data were combined from 49 studies, including 53 835 cases and 50 156 controls, of which 89 050 (46 450 cases and 42 600 controls) were of European ancestry, 12 893 (6269 cases and 6624 controls) of Asian and 2048 (1116 cases and 932 controls) of African ancestry. Associations with risk of breast cancer, overall and by disease sub-type, were assessed using unconditional logistic regression.Results: Little evidence of association with breast cancer risk was observed for SNPs in the FGF receptor genes. The strongest evidence in European women was for rs743682 in FGFR3; the estimated per-allele odds ratio was 1.05 (95% confidence interval 1.02-1.09, P=0.0020), which is substantially lower than that observed for SNPs in FGFR2.Conclusion: Our results suggest that common variants in the other FGF receptors are not associated with risk of breast cancer to the degree observed for FGFR2. Fulltext embargoed for: 12 months post date of publication

Like water dripping on a stone: establishing and maintaining communities of practice for organisational information governance

2018-12-18T06:45:31Z

Like water dripping on a stone: establishing and maintaining communities of practice for organisational information governance PARR, ADELAIDE; Newton, Sally It’s almost an inevitable conversation we have with our colleagues – we are under resourced, understaffed and yet we work in one of the fastest changing industries there is, with additional responsibilities arriving daily. Yet we are not alone in our organisations – we are surrounded by colleagues whose day to day work is the focus of our activities and who, with support, training and organisation can become our best allies in wearing away ignorance about information management. This presentation gives an overview of two Communities of Practice established at the University of Melbourne to support good information governance in the University community. At the University, responsibility for records management– including classification, appraisal and destruction - is devolved. With a dedicated core Records to other staff ratio of less than 1:1000, it seemed obvious that the only way to effectively manage information was to enlist the support and goodwill of other staff to achieve our information management outcomes. © 2013 The Records and Information Management Professionals Australasia

Genetic Predisposition to In Situ and Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast

2018-12-18T04:02:21Z

Genetic Predisposition to In Situ and Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast Sawyer, Elinor; Roylance, Rebecca; Petridis, Christos; Brook, Mark N.; Nowinski, Salpie; Papouli, Efterpi; Fletcher, Olivia; Pinder, Sarah; Hanby, Andrew; Kohut, Kelly; Gorman, Patricia; Caneppele, Michele; Peto, Julian; Silva, Isabel dos Santos Invasive lobular breast cancer (ILC) accounts for 10-15% of all invasive breast carcinomas. It is generally ER positive (ER+) and often associated with lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS). Genome-wide association studies have identified more than 70 common polymorphisms that predispose to breast cancer, but these studies included predominantly ductal (IDC) carcinomas. To identify novel common polymorphisms that predispose to ILC and LCIS, we pooled data from 6,023 cases (5,622 ILC, 401 pure LCIS) and 34,271 controls from 36 studies genotyped using the iCOGS chip. Six novel SNPs most strongly associated with ILC/LCIS in the pooled analysis were genotyped in a further 516 lobular cases (482 ILC, 36 LCIS) and 1,467 controls. These analyses identified a lobular-specific SNP at 7q34 (rs11977670, OR (95% CI) for ILC = 1.13 (1.09-1.18), P = 6.0x10(-10); P-het for ILC vs IDC ER+ tumors = 1.8x10(-4)). Of the 75 known breast cancer polymorphisms that were genotyped, 56 were associated with ILC and 15 with LCIS at P<0.05. Two SNPs showed significantly stronger associations for ILC than LCIS (rs2981579/10q26/FGFR2, P-het = 0.04 and rs889312/5q11/MAP3K1, P-het = 0.03); and two showed stronger associations for LCIS than ILC (rs6678914/1q32/LGR6, P-het = 0.001 and rs1752911/6q14, P-het = 0.04). In addition, seven of the 75 known loci showed significant differences between ER+ tumors with IDC and ILC histology, three of these showing stronger associations for ILC (rs11249433/1p11, rs2981579/10q26/FGFR2 and rs10995190/10q21/ZNF365) and four associated only with IDC (5p12/rs10941679; rs2588809/14q24/RAD51L1, rs6472903/8q21 and rs1550623/2q31/CDCA7). In conclusion, we have identified one novel lobular breast cancer specific predisposition polymorphism at 7q34, and shown for the first time that common breast cancer polymorphisms predispose to LCIS. We have shown that many of the ER+ breast cancer predisposition loci also predispose to ILC, although there is some heterogeneity between ER+ lobular and ER+ IDC tumors. These data provide evidence for overlapping, but distinct etiological pathways within ER+ breast cancer between morphological subtypes.