Does Interbank Borrowing Reduce Bank Risk?

In this paper we investigate whether banks that borrow from other banks have lower risk levels. We concentrate on a large sample of Central and Eastern European banks which allows us to explore the impact of interbank lending when exposures are long-term and interbank borrowers are small banks. The results of the empirical analysis generally confirm the hypothesis that long-term interbank exposures result in lower risk of the borrowing banks

Does Interbank Borrowing Reduce Bank Risk?

In this paper we investigate whether banks that borrow from other banks have lower risk levels. We concentrate on a large sample of Central and Eastern European banks which allows us to explore the impact of interbank lending when exposures are long-term and interbank borrowers are small banks. The results of the empirical analysis generally confirm the hypothesis that long-term interbank exposures result in lower risk of the borrowing banks.interbank market; bank risk; market discipline; transition countries

Banking sector (under?) development in Central and Eastern Europe

By introducing a new measure of the banking systems' size, the paper challenges the existing consensus on severe underdevelopment of the CEE banking sectors. We argue that the existing studies on the size of CEE banking systems exaggerate the real degree of underdevelopment because common measures of the size of the banking system produce downward biased results when applied to transition economies. We compare various measures of the size of the CEE banking sectors with those of several 'old' European Union (EU) member countries which are used as benchmarks. The comparison indicates that indeed the banking sectors in the CEE countries lag behind the most developed financial systems in the EU, but are very close to the levels in the financially less developed EU countries

Analyzing support of postnatal transition in term infants after c-section

Background: Whereas good data are available on the resuscitation of infants, little is known regarding support of postnatal transition in low-risk term infants after c-section. The present study was performed to describe current delivery room (DR) management of term infants born by c-section in our institution by analyzing videos that were recorded within a quality assurance program. Methods: DR- management is routinely recorded within a quality assurance program. Cross-sectional study of videos of term infants born by c-section. Videos were analyzed with respect to time point, duration and number of all medical interventions. Study period was between January and December 2012. Results: 186 videos were analyzed. The majority of infants (73%) were without support of postnatal transition. In infants with support of transition, majority of infants received respiratory support, starting in median after 3.4 minutes (range 0.4-14.2) and lasting for 8.8 (1.5-28.5) minutes. Only 33% of infants with support had to be admitted to the NICU, the remaining infants were returned to the mother after a median of 13.5 (8-42) minutes. A great inter- and intra-individual variation with respect to the sequence of interventions was found. Conclusions: The study provides data for an internal quality improvement program and supports the benefit of using routine video recording of DR-management. Furthermore, data can be used for benchmarking with current practice in other centers

Quality of life and hormone use: new validation results of MRS scale

BACKGROUND: The Menopause Rating Scale is a health-related Quality of Life scale developed in the early 1990s and step-by-step validated since then. Recently the MRS scale was validated as outcomes measure for hormone therapy. The suspicion however was expressed that the data were too optimistic due to methodological problems of the study. A new study became available to check how founded this suspicion was. METHOD: An open post-marketing study of 3282 women with pre- and post- treatment data of the self-administered version of the MRS scale was analyzed to evaluate the capacity of the scale to detect hormone treatment related effects with the MRS scale. The main results were then compared with the old study where the interview-based version of the MRS scale was used. RESULTS: The hormone-therapy related improvement of complaints relative to the baseline score was about or less than 30% in total or domain scores, whereas it exceeded 30% improvement in the old study. Similarly, the relative improvement after therapy, stratified by the degree of severity at baseline, was lower in the new than in the old study, but had the same slope. Although we cannot exclude different treatment effects with the study method used, this supports our hypothesis that the individual MRS interviews performed by the physician biased the results towards over-estimation of the treatment effects. This hypothesis is underlined by the degree of concordance of physician's assessment and patient's perception of treatment success (MRS results): Sensitivity (correct prediction of the positive assessment by the treating physician) of the MRS and specificity (correct prediction of a negative assessment by the physician) were lower than the results obtained with the interview-based MRS scale in the previous publication. CONCLUSION: The study confirmed evidence for the capacity of the MRS scale to measure treatment effects on quality of life across the full range of severity of complaints before treatment. The difference of the relative improvement after therapy between the old and current study as well as the observed different sensitivity/specificity is – as a matter of probability – more likely to be caused by a bias introduced by the different application of the MRS scale than by real differences in the efficacy of the therapy. A randomized clinical trial would be needed to test the impact of the latter. The message for future studies is: The MRS scale should be only used as self-administered tool where the suggestive effect of questions raised by health professionals ("therapeutic optimism") can be largely excluded

Colon cancer risk and different HRT formulations: a case-control study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Most studies have found no increased risk of colon cancer associated with hormone replacement therapy (HRT), or even a decreased risk. But information about the effects of different HRT preparations is lacking.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A case-control study was performed within Germany in collaboration with regional cancer registries and tumor centers. Up to 5 controls were matched to each case of colon cancer. Conditional logistic regression analysis was applied to estimate crude and adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Stratified analyses were performed to get an impression of the risk associated with different estrogens and progestins.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 354 cases of colon cancer were compared with 1422 matched controls. The adjusted overall risk estimate for colon cancer (ColC) associated with ever-use of HRT was 0.97 (0.71 – 1.32). No clinically relevant trends for ColC risk were observed with increasing duration of HRT use, or increasing time since first or last HRT use in aggregate.</p> <p>Whereas the overall risk estimates were stable, the numbers in many of the sub-analyses of HRT preparation groups (estrogens and progestins) were too small for conclusions. Nevertheless, if the ColC risk estimates are taken at face value, most seemed to be reduced compared with never-use of HRT, but did not vary much across HRT formulation subgroups. In particular, no substantial difference in ColC risk was observed between HRT-containing conjugated equine estrogens (CEE) or medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) and other formulations more common in Europe.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Ever-use of HRT was not associated with an increased risk of colon cancer. In contrary, most risk estimates pointed non-significantly toward a lower ColC risk in HRT ever user. They did not vary markedly among different HRT formulations (estrogens, progestins). However, the small numbers and the overlapping nature of the subgroups suggest cautious interpretation.</p

The Competitive Advantage of Incumbents: Evidence from Newly Liberalized Banking Industries

The paper analyzes banking competition in newly liberalized banking industries, where the incumbent banks still dominate the deposit market but are exposed to substantial loan market competition. We argue that incumbent banks, due to their preferential position in the deposit market, are able to generate higher margins than new entrants. Moreover, margins of new entrants are negatively affected by the incumbents' preferential position in the deposit market. The analysis is based on data from 296 banks from ten Central and Eastern European countries for the period 1995-2004.

Does Interbank Borrowing Reduce Bank Risk?

In this paper we investigate whether banks that borrow from other banks have lower risk levels. We concentrate on a large sample of Central and Eastern European banks which allows us to explore the impact of interbank lending when exposures are long-term and interbank borrowers are small banks. The results of the empirical analysis generally confirm the hypothesis that long-term interbank exposures result in lower risk of the borrowing banks.bank risk; interbank market; market discipline; transition countries

Does Interbank Borrowing Reduce Bank Risk?

In this paper we investigate whether banks that borrow from other banks have lower risk levels. We concentrate on a large sample of Central and Eastern European banks that allows us to explore the impact of interbank lending when exposures are long term and interbank borrowers are small banks. The results of the empirical analysis generally confirm the hypothesis that long-term interbank exposures result in lower risk of the borrowing banks. Copyright (c) 2009 The Ohio State University.