Masters Dissertation Example

findings implemented in developing countries than developed (X
2
=4.32,df=1,p-value=0.04). 
Whether or not the corresponding author was resident in the country of study had no 
significant influence on the uptake of findings (fig. 12 (a)), but interestingly there were 
significantly higher levels of uptake if co-authors were resident in the country of study (fig. 12 
(b)), This had greater significance than when the two variables were combined into a single 
variable of whether any of the authors were resident (X
2
=5.48,df = 1,p=0.02).

---

40 
Fig 12. Implementation of findings according to whether the corresponding authors (a) or co-authors (b) 
were resident in the country of study. There was no significance of corresponding author residence 
(X
2
=3.24, df=1, p=0.07) but a higher proportion of findings implemented if a co-author was resident (X
2
= 
7.80, df = 1, p= 0.004). 
Further analysis showed this to be due to characteristics of research in which only the 
corresponding author was resident (fig. 13; section 4.6), possibly due to attributes of single 
author papers. Therefore, whether or not a co-author was resident in the country of study was 
the best predictor of uptake of findings and used in further analysis 
Fig 13. Implementation of findings according to whether both authors (Both), co-authors only (Co), 
corresponding authors only (Cor) or no authors (None) were resident in the country of study. The levels of 
implementation were significantly higher when both co and corresponding authors were resident than 
when there was no resident author (z=2.75, df=453,p=0.005,), but when only the corresponding author was 
resident, there was actually a lower level of implementation than when both or co-authors were resident,