89 research outputs found
International capital flows : do short-term investment and direct investment differ?
No full textThe authors examine the behavior of four major components of international capital flows in 15 developing and industrial countries. Striking differences in the behavior of the component flows arise in general specifications that allow the flows to interact. For example, the behavior of international short-term investment appears to be sensitive to changes in all the other types of international capital flows, including direct investment, but direct investment appears to be insensitive to such changes. In finding that short-term investment appears to respond more dramatically to disturbances in other capital flows and in other countries than does direct investment, the authors provide empirical support for the conventional notion that short-term investment is"hot money"and direct investment is not.International Terrorism&Counterterrorism,Economic Theory&Research,Payment Systems&Infrastructure,Fiscal&Monetary Policy,Capital Markets and Capital Flows,Financial Intermediation,International Terrorism&Counterterrorism,Economic Theory&Research,Banks&Banking Reform,Capital Flows
[Photograph 2012.201.B1068.0046]
No full textPhotograph used for a story in the Daily Oklahoman newspaper. Caption: "Peter Punam, author of the autobiography, "Cast Off the Darkness.
Evidence of acceptability of oral paediatric medicines: a review
No full textObjectivesThe aim of this review was to map the currently available evidence on acceptability of oral paediatric medicines to aid in the selection of suitable platform formulations for the development of new acceptable paediatric products.MethodsThis process used a defined search strategy of indexed publications and included methods to assess the quality of the evidence retrieved.Key FindingsTaste/palatability was the most extensively studied area of paediatric medicine acceptability yet standard methods or criteria that define what is classed as acceptable to children is still to be defined. There have been many reports on the acceptability of medicines to paediatric populations yet major gaps in the acceptability knowledge base exist including: the shape and dimensions oftablets, minitablets and capsules swallowed whole in infants and children; size and overall volume of multiparticulates; volume of liquids completely swallowed in infants and children; duration of retention within the oral cavity, size and taste of orodispersible tablets, lozenges and chewable tablets and the number of solid units dosed at each timepoint.ConclusionsThe review highlights where further information is required to support knowledge around acceptability of age appropriate medicines. An algorithm to aid in selection of a formulation that is likely to be acceptable based on the age range to be treated by the medicine is presented as a result of this review
Methodology Used to Assess Acceptability of Oral Pediatric Medicines:A Systematic Literature Search and Narrative Review
No full textBACKGROUND: Regulatory guidelines require that any new medicine designed for a pediatric population must be demonstrated as being acceptable to that population. There is currently no guidance on how to conduct or report on acceptability testing.AIM: Our objective was to undertake a review of the methods used to assess the acceptability of medicines within a pediatric population and use this review to propose the most appropriate methodology.METHODS: We used a defined search strategy to identify literature reports of acceptability assessments of medicines conducted within pediatric populations and extracted information about the tools used in these studies for comparison across studies.RESULTS: In total, 61 articles were included in the analysis. Palatability was the most common (54/61) attribute measured when evaluating acceptability. Simple scale methods were most commonly used, with visual analog scales (VAS) and hedonic scales used both separately and in combination in 34 of the 61 studies. Hedonic scales alone were used in 14 studies and VAS alone in just five studies. Other tools included Likert scales; forced choice or preference; surveys or questionnaires; observations of facial expressions during administration, ease of swallowing, or ability to swallow the dosage; prevalence of complaints or refusal to take the medicine; and time taken for a nurse to administer the medicine.CONCLUSIONS: The best scale in terms of validity, reliability, feasibility, and preference to use when assessing acceptability remains unclear. Further work is required to select the most appropriate method to justify whether a medicine is acceptable to a pediatric population.</p
Costs and benefits of debt and debt service reduction
No full textThe author evaluates the costs and benefits of debt and debt service reduction (DDSR) from the point of view of five countries that have concluded Brady deals: Costa Rica, Mexico, the Philippines, Uruguay, and Venezuela. He concludes that, contrary to widely held views, commercial banks have probably benefited from the operations. Commercial bank participation in DDSR is voluntary, so direct financial savings to the country are probably negative at present values. The benefit from DDSR is not that debt is bought at"bargain prices"at the expense of commercial banks. It appears difficult to justify a DDSR operation on purely financial grounds. A more realistic way to look at a DDSR operation is to view it as a"project"that involves a certain financial cost. The return on such a project is how the DDSR operation improves the macroeconomy, or contributes to development. The main purpose of DDSR is to establish a more efficient arrangement between debtor countries and commercial banks, leading to improved conditions for development. A DDSR operation that does not help development is costly and should not be undertaken. The impact of DDSR on development is usually measured by the increase in the growth rate of GDP, but it is too soon to measure that for these five countries. A suitable alternative is to look at the change in investment patterns. A strong policy framework is needed if debt and debt service reduction are to significantly improve development. In Mexico and, to a lesser extent, Venezuela, improved and sustained strong adjustment policies have generated the greatest development benefits. Gains have been less in smaller countries where policies were not as supportive. The author concludes that for a country to benefit from DDSR, it needs significant indirect benefits (such as increased domestic and foreign savings). Direct benefits are likely to be negative because of the commercial banks'financial gains and because DDSR operations are frontloaded. DDSR operations cannot be justified solely by direct benefits and savings in cash flow.Strategic Debt Management,Banks&Banking Reform,Economic Theory&Research,Environmental Economics&Policies,Financial Intermediation
Classification bias in commercial business lists for retail food stores in the U.S.
No full textAbstract Background Aspects of the food environment such as the availability of different types of food stores have recently emerged as key modifiable factors that may contribute to the increased prevalence of obesity. Given that many of these studies have derived their results based on secondary datasets and the relationship of food stores with individual weight outcomes has been reported to vary by store type, it is important to understand the extent to which often-used secondary data correctly classify food stores. We evaluated the classification bias of food stores in Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) and InfoUSA commercial business lists. Methods We performed a full census in 274 randomly selected census tracts in the Chicago metropolitan area and collected detailed store attributes inside stores for classification. Store attributes were compared by classification match status and store type. Systematic classification bias by census tract characteristics was assessed in multivariate regression. Results D&B had a higher classification match rate than InfoUSA for supermarkets and grocery stores, while InfoUSA was higher for convenience stores. Both lists were more likely to correctly classify large supermarkets, grocery stores, and convenience stores with more cash registers and different types of service counters (supermarkets and grocery stores only). The likelihood of a correct classification match for supermarkets and grocery stores did not vary systemically by tract characteristics whereas convenience stores were more likely to be misclassified in predominately Black tracts. Conclusion Researches can rely on classification of food stores in commercial datasets for supermarkets and grocery stores whereas classifications for convenience and specialty food stores are subject to some systematic bias by neighborhood racial/ethnic composition.</p
Methodology Used to Assess Acceptability of Oral Pediatric Medicines: A Systematic Literature Search and Narrative Review
No full textDistance to specialist medical care and diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea in rural Saskatchewan
No full textDecentralizing infrastructure : for good or ill?
No full textThe author examines the many faces of infrastructure decentralization: the costs and benefits, the government structure (constraint or variable?), the"polycentric"approach, and how to make decentralization work (for whom?). He proposes basic principles and guidelines for policy design, for both small projects and large. Broadly, these guidelines are summed up in a few propositions. In all countries, some critical infrastructure is provided through a decentralized political structure. Current trends make that likely to be more true in the future. Decentralization, however defined, in and of itself had no necessary implications for good or evil so far as infrastructure is concerned: its effects depend on the incentives various decisionmakers face. The key to ensuring that these incentives are conducive to"good"decisions (about design, siting, timing, finance, pricing, operation, maintenance, and use of infrastructure) is to ensure that those who made the decisions bear the financial (and political) consequences, as much as possible. Politically, this means that political leaders at all levels should be responsive and responsible to their constituents, and that those constituents are fully informed about the consequences of all decisions. Making politicians bear the consequences of their own mistakes is as close as one can get to a"hard"political budget constraint. Economically, it must be difficult for local residents to shift cost to nonresidents who do not receive benefits and to make local decisionmakers fully responsible to their citizens for the use they make of revenues collected from them (through local taxes), to users of infrastructure (local or otherwise) for the use made of the revenues they contribute (through user charges of various sorts), and to taxpayers in general for the use made of any transfers (or subsidized loans) they receive. Administratively, what such a system requires is a clear set of"framework"laws (on local budgeting, financial reporting, taxation, contracting, dispute settlement, rules to be followed in designing user charges and so on), as well as adequate institutional support for localities to operate in this environment. To the extent that these conditions are not met, the perverse incentives that too often exist because of the structure and finance of the public sector in many countries will probably be exacerbated by the current tendency to decentralize more and more decisions in the public sector.National Governance,Banks&Banking Reform,Municipal Financial Management,Public Sector Economics&Finance,Economic Theory&Research
When is a life too costly to save? : evidence from U.S. environmental regulations
No full textExcept for two relatively minor statutes, U.S. environmental laws do not permit the balancing of costs and benefits in setting environmental standards. The Clean Air Act, for example, prohibits the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from considering costs in setting ambient air quality standards. Similarly, the Clean Water Act does not allow consideration of benefits in setting effluent standards. When the EPA is allowed to balance benefits against costs, it has considerable discretion in defining"balancing."The authors ask two questions: Whether allowed to or not, has the EPA balanced costs and benefits in setting environmental standards? Where has the EPA drawn the line in deciding how much to spend to save a statistical life? Their answers are based on data about the costs and benefits of regulations involving three classes of pollutants: cancer-causing pesticides usedon food crops (1975-89); carcinogenic air pollutants (1975-90); and all uses of asbestos regulated under the Toxic Substances Control Act. The following are their findings. The EPA behaved as though it were balancing costs and benefits in its regulation of pesticides under Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and of asbestos under Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA), the two so-called balancing statutes. The higher the cost of the ban, the less likely the EPA was to ban the use of these products. The greater the number of lives saved, the more likely the EPA was to ban their use. But the amount the EPA was (implicitly) willing to spend to save a life was high: 49 million to avoid cancer through exposure to asbestos. The value the EPA attached to saving a life was higher for workers than for consumers. The value attached to avoiding a case of cancer through exposure to pesticide resides on food was less than 52 million value of preventing cancer among pesticide applicators - perhaps because workers are exposed to higher levels of pollution than consumers. After 1987, when the Natural Resources Defense Council sued the EPA for considering costs in setting emissions standards for vinyl chloride, the EPA considered costs in setting emissions standards only after an acceptable level of risk was achieved. Ironically, before the vinyl chloride decision, the value per cancer case avoided was only $15 million. The amount the EPA was willing to spend to save a life was thus less under the Clean Air Act than under the balancing statutes. But after this decision, the EPA did not consider costs at all if the risk of cancer to the maximally exposed individual was above one in 10,000.Environmental Economics&Policies,Health Monitoring&Evaluation,Economic Theory&Research,Health Economics&Finance,Montreal Protocol
- …
