Do ‘Liberal Market Economies’ Really Innovate More Radically than ‘Coordinated Market Economies’? Hall & Soskice Reconsidered

In their influential book Varieties of Capitalism; The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage, Peter A. Hall and David Soskice argue that the technological specialization patterns of developed countries are largely determined by the varieties of capitalism prevailing in these countries. They hypothesize that liberal market economies (LMEs) specialize in radical innovation, while coordinated market economies (CMEs) focus more on incremental innovation. We argue that Hall and Soskice’s empirical test of this hypothesis is fundamentally flawed and propose a more appropriate and rigorous test of their conjecture, based on patent citation data. The manufacturingwide industry-level results indicate that the hypothesis does not survive further scrutiny

Athletic trainers\u27 or athletic training students\u27 perceptions of sexual harassment by student-athletes in the collegiate setting

Sexual harassment is an issue that occurs in healthcare professions and on college campuses nationwide. Athletic trainers employed at the collegiate setting are healthcare professionals who work in close conjunction with student-athletes, which may predispose a risk of a sexual harassment occurrence. A study was conducted to investigate the sexual harassment of athletic trainers and athletic training students by student athletes at the collegiate setting. A Qualtrics survey, containing closed- and open-ended questions, was sent out to 297 CAATE-accredited athletic training program directors; the athletic training staff at these institutions were also sent the survey as well. The program directors were asked to send the survey to the students currently enrolled in the program. Quantitative data were analyzed using Qualtrics and the qualitative data were analyzed using themes and coding. The study revealed that athletic trainers and athletic training students were sexually harassed by student-athletes on at least one occasion. 40% of the respondents stated being sexually harassed by a student-athlete, and 59% observed sexual harassment of a member of the athletic training staff on at least one instance

Safety assessment of probiotics for human use

The safety of probiotics is tied to their intended use, which includes consideration of potential vulnerability of the consumer or patient, dose and duration of consumption, and both the manner and frequency of administration. Unique to probiotics is that they are alive when administered, and unlike other food or drug ingredients, possess the potential for infectivity or in situ toxin production. Since numerous types of microbes are used as probiotics, safety is also intricately tied to the nature of the specific microbe being used. The presence of transferable antibiotic resistance genes, which comprises a theoretical risk of transfer to a less innocuous member of the gut microbial community, must also be considered. Genetic stability of the probiotic over time, deleterious metabolic activities, and the potential for pathogenicity or toxicogenicity must be assessed depending on the characteristics of the genus and species of the microbe being used. Immunological effects must be considered, especially in certain vulnerable populations, including infants with undeveloped immune function. A few reports about negative probiotic effects have surfaced, the significance of which would be better understood with more complete understanding of the mechanisms of probiotic interaction with the host and colonizing microbes. Use of readily available and low cost genomic sequencing technologies to assure the absence of genes of concern is advisable for candidate probiotic strains. The field of probiotic safety is characterized by the scarcity of studies specifically designed to assess safety contrasted with the long history of safe use of many of these microbes in foods

Re-evaluating a vision-related quality of life questionnaire with item response theory (IRT) and differential item functioning (DIF) analyses

Background: For the Low Vision Quality Of Life questionnaire (LVQOL) it is unknown whether the psychometric properties are satisfactory when an item response theory (IRT) perspective is considered. This study evaluates some essential psychometric properties of the LVQOL questionnaire in an IRT model, and investigates differential item functioning (DIF). Methods: Cross-sectional data were used from an observational study among visually-impaired patients (n = 296). Calibration was performed for every dimension of the LVQOL in the graded response model. Item goodness-of-fit was assessed with the S-X2-test. DIF was assessed on relevant background variables (i.e. age, gender, visual acuity, eye condition, rehabilitation type and administration type) with likelihood-ratio tests for DIF. The magnitude of DIF was interpreted by assessing the largest difference in expected scores between subgroups. Measurement precision was assessed by presenting test information curves; reliability with the index of subject separation. Results: All items of the LVQOL dimensions fitted the model. There was significant DIF on several items. For two items the maximum difference between expected scores exceeded one point, and DIF was found on multiple relevant background variables. Item 1 ‘Vision in general’ from the “Adjustment” dimension and item 24 ‘Using tools’ from the “Reading and fine work” dimension were removed. Test information was highest for the “Reading and fine work” dimension. Indices for subject separation ranged from 0.83 to 0.94. Conclusions: The items of the LVQOL showed satisfactory item fit to the graded response model; however, two items were removed because of DIF. The adapted LVQOL with 21 items is DIF-free and therefore seems highly appropriate for use in heterogeneous populations of visually impaired patients. (aut.ref.