The aid effectiveness literature : the sad results of 40 years of research

The aid effectiveness literature (AEL) consists of empirical macroeconomic estimates of the effects of development aid. By the end of 2004, it comprised 97 econometric studies of three families of related effects. Each family has been analyzed in a separate meta-analysis. The AEL is an ideal subject for meta-analysis as it uses only a few formally similar models to estimate the same underlying effects. It is also an area with strong beliefs, often generated by altruism. When this whole literature is examined, a clear pattern emerges. After 40 years of development aid, the preponderance of the evidence indicates that aid has not been effective. We show that the distribution of results is significantly asymmetric reflecting the reluctance of the research community to publish negative results. The Dutch disease effect on exchange rates provides a plausible explanation for the observed aid ineffectiveness.

American and Australian doctoral literature reviewing practices and pedagogies

The literature review is fundamental to the doctoral enterprise of academic disciplines, yet research into how the doctoral literature review is learned, taught or experienced is limited. Responding to an apparent under-examination of the literature review as a critical feature of doctoral learning, this thesis investigates the doctoral literature review process as experienced by American and Australian doctoral candidates, doctoral supervisors and academic librarians. The research followed a qualitative approach shaped by two questions: "How is the doctoral literature review process learned?" and, "What is learned by doing a doctoral literature review?" Data were generated from in-depth interviews conducted with 42 participants in education, nursing and the physical and biological sciences. Critical literacy, critical pedagogy and critical information literacy provided frameworks for interpreting participants‘ experiences and perspectives on literature reviewing practices, disciplinary influences and mutually associated doctoral literacies.

The doctoral literature review is traditionally considered to be two segregated events—literature seeking and writing in an academic genre. The study findings challenge this perspective, proposing instead that doctoral literature reviewing is a complex, comprehensive process characterised by interdependent activities in a cycle of gathering, reflecting upon and synthesising literatures. Moreover, these findings indicate that, by engaging with disciplinary literatures and the literature review process, doctoral researchers become familiar with an array of critical doctoral literacies—disciplinary literacy, information literacy and reading and writing literacies. Thus, the doctoral literature review can be conceptualised as a pedagogy through which candidates acquire the lived practices and craft skills of disciplinary-specific research; learn to manage large bodies of information, literature and knowledge; and learn to read and write as scholars in their disciplines.

This project reconceptualises traditional perspectives on doctoral literature reviewing and recommends further exploration into its pedagogical potential. By approaching the doctoral literature review as a pedagogical process, the inquiry attempts to unpack literacies embedded within the doctoral enterprise, thereby exposing them as explicit aspects of doctoral learning. Becoming aware of the interrelatedness of critical doctoral literacies can mobilise supervisors, librarians and candidates to exploit the literature review process more fully. Ultimately, this research contributes to an international focus on a central feature of the doctorate and, as such, more broadly informs and supports doctoral pedagogy, particularly for those involved in American and Australian doctoral education.

Effectiveness of IT-based diabetes management interventions: a review of the literature

Background : Information technology (IT) is increasingly being used in general practice to manage health care including type 2 diabetes. However, there is conflicting evidence about whether IT improves diabetes outcomes. This review of the literature about IT-based diabetes management interventions explores whether methodological issues such as sample characteristics, outcome measures, and mechanisms causing change in the outcome measures could explain some of the inconsistent findings evident in IT-based diabetes management studies.

Methods : Databases were searched using terms related to IT and diabetes management. Articles eligible for review evaluated an IT-based diabetes management intervention in general practice and were published between 1999 and 2009 inclusive in English. Studies that did not include outcome measures were excluded.

Results : Four hundred and twenty-five articles were identified, sixteen met the inclusion criteria: eleven GP focussed and five patient focused interventions were evaluated. Nine were RCTs, five non-randomised control trials, and two single-sample before and after designs. Important sample characteristics such as diabetes type, familiarity with IT, and baseline diabetes knowledge were not addressed in any of the studies reviewed. All studies used HbA1c as a primary outcome measure, and nine reported a significant improvement in mean HbA1c over the study period; only two studies reported the HbA1c assay method. Five studies measured diabetes medications and two measured psychological outcomes. Patient lifestyle variables were not included in any of the studies reviewed. IT was the intervention method considered to effect changes in the outcome measures. Only two studies mentioned alternative possible causal mechanisms.

Conclusion : Several limitations could affect the outcomes of IT-based diabetes management interventions to an unknown degree. These limitations make it difficult to attribute changes solely to such interventions.