Towards a reference model for SOA governance (extended version)

Although the lack of elaborate governance mechanisms is often seen as the main reason for failures of SOA projects, SOA governance is still very low in maturity. In this paper, we follow a design science approach to address this drawback by presenting a framework that can guide organisations in implementing a governance approach for SOA more successfully. We have reviewed the highly advanced IT governance frameworks Cobit and ITIL and mapped them to the SOA domain. The resulting blueprint for an SOA governance framework was refined based on a detailed literature review, expert interviews and a practical application in a government organisation. The proposed framework stresses the need for business representatives to get involved in SOA decisions and to define benefits ownership for services.

On the use of different spatial reference frames for movement control

Previous work has shown that amplitude and direction are two independently controlled parameters of aimed arm movements, and performance, therefore, suffers when they must be decomposed into Cartesian coordinates. We now compare decomposition into different coordinate systems. Subjects pointed at visual targets in 2-D with a cursor, using a two-axis joystick or two single-axis joysticks. In the latter case, joystick axes were aligned with the subjects’ body axes, were rotated by –45°, or were oblique (i.e., one axis was in an egocentric frame and the other was rotated by –45°). Cursor direction always corresponded to joystick direction. We found that compared with the two-axis joystick, responses with single-axis joysticks were slower and less accurate when the axes were oriented egocentrically; the deficit was even more pronounced when the axes were rotated and was most pronounced when they were oblique. This confirms that decomposition of motor commands is computationally demanding and documents that this demand is lowest for egocentric, higher for rotated, and highest for oblique coordinates. We conclude that most current vehicles use computationally demanding man–machine interfaces.

‘Keep telling until someone listens’ : understanding prevention concepts in children’s picture books dealing with child sexual abuse

Children’s picture books dealing with the topic of child sexual abuse appeared in the 1980s with the aim of addressing the need for age-appropriate texts to teach sexual abuse prevention concepts and to provide support for young children who may be at risk of or have already experienced sexual abuse. Despite the apparent potential of children’s picture books to convey child sexual abuse prevention concepts, very few studies have addressed the topic of child sexual abuse in children’s literature. This article critically examines a selection of 15 picture books (published in the US, Canada and Australia) for children aged 3–8 years dealing with this theme. It makes use of an established set of evaluative criteria to conduct an audit of the books’ content and applies techniques of literary discourse analysis to explain how these picture books satisfy criteria for child sexual abuse prevention. The analysis is used as a way to understand the discourses available to readers, both adults and children, on the topic of child sexual abuse. Key themes in the books include children’s empowerment and agency, and the need for persistence and hope.

Informed consent : the review of the law of negligence and the utility of reference to NHMRC guidelines

Although rarely referred to in litigation in the years that have followed the Ipp Review Report, there may well be some merit in more frequent judicial reference to the NHMRC guidelines for medical practitioners on providing information to patients 2004.

Reference bias : presentation of extreme health states prior to EQ-VAS improves health-related quality of life scores. A randomised crossover trial.

Background: Clinical practice and clinical research has made a concerted effort to move beyond the use of clinical indicators alone and embrace patient focused care through the use of patient reported outcomes such as healthrelated quality of life. However, unless patients give consistent consideration to the health states that give meaning to measurement scales used to evaluate these constructs, longitudinal comparison of these measures may be invalid. This study aimed to investigate whether patients give consideration to a standard health state rating scale (EQ-VAS) and whether consideration of good and poor health state descriptors immediately changes their selfreport. Methods: A randomised crossover trial was implemented amongst hospitalised older adults (n = 151). Patients were asked to consider descriptions of extremely good (Description-A) and poor (Description-B) health states. The EQ-VAS was administered as a self-report at baseline, after the first descriptors (A or B), then again after the remaining descriptors (B or A respectively). At baseline patients were also asked if they had considered either EQVAS anchors. Results: Overall 106/151 (70%) participants changed their self-evaluation by ≥5 points on the 100 point VAS, with a mean (SD) change of +4.5 (12) points (p < 0.001). A total of 74/151 (49%) participants did not consider the best health VAS anchor, of the 77 who did 59 (77%) thought the good health descriptors were more extreme (better) then they had previously considered. Similarly 85/151 (66%) participants did not consider the worst health anchor of the 66 who did 63 (95%) thought the poor health descriptors were more extreme (worse) then they had previously considered. Conclusions: Health state self-reports may not be well considered. An immediate significant shift in response can be elicited by exposure to a mere description of an extreme health state despite no actual change in underlying health state occurring. Caution should be exercised in research and clinical settings when interpreting subjective patient reported outcomes that are dependent on brief anchors for meaning. Trial Registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (#ACTRN12607000606482) http://www.anzctr. org.au