Stock Returns and Inflation: Some New Evidence

Using aggregate and industry-wise monthly UK data over a period of 44 years we examine the long run relationship between stock return index (St) and retail price index (Pt) in a VAR framework. Univariate tests confirm Pt as I(2); nevertheless pairs of St and Pt are co-integrated and share common I(1) trend. There is no evidence of shared I(2) trend. We find evidence of shifts in the co- integrating ranks and parameters, and accounting for these shifts improved estimates’ precision. The long run price elasticity of return index is consistently above unity, a finding that stands in sharp contrast to the existing ones. Overall our results suggest that tax-paying stock investors are fully insulated against inflation in the long run

The Dynamics of International R & D spillovers

Coe and Helpman (1995) among others report positive and equivalent R&D spillovers across groups of countries. However, the nature of their econometric tests does not address the heterogeneity of knowledge diffusion across countries. We empirically examine these issues in a sample of 10 OECD countries by extending both the time span and the coverage of R&D activities in the data set. We find that the elasticity of total factor productivity with respect to domestic and foreign R&D stocks is extremely heterogeneous across countries and that data cannot be pooled. Thus, panel estimates conceal important cross-country differences. The US appears to be a net loser in terms of international R&D spillovers. Our interpretation is that when competitors ‘catch-up’ technologically, they challenge US market shares and investments worldwide. This has implications for US productivity

Are international R&D spillovers costly for the US?

Coe and Helpman (1995) and others report positive and equivalent R&D spillovers across G7 countries. We argue that their homogeneity constraint on spillovers across G7 countries is inappropriate, and show that it is rejected by the data. Extending the data set and applying new empirical approaches, we find: (i) R&D spillovers are extremely heterogeneous across G7 countries; (ii) panel estimates do not correspond to country specific estimates and conceal important cross-country differences in knowledge diffusion; and (iii) the US is a net loser in terms of international R&D spillovers. Our interpretation is that when competitors ‘catch-up’ technologically, they challenge US market shares and investments worldwide and this has implications for US productivity

Does local knowledge spillover matter for firm productivity? The role of financial access and corporate governance

Global productivity growth has either stagnated or declined, despite continued technological innovations with the rise of knowledge-intensive intangibles that arise from the growth of knowledge stock (R&D activities). Understanding the root causes of this paradox in the context of growing economies requires an investigation of whether local knowledge diffusion can explain firm-level productivity differences, including key constraining factors like sources of financing or corporate governance structure. Using financial data of 7970 Indian firms over a 20-year period and clustering firms across industries, we assess the impact of R&D stock that is external to the firm through estimating both within (intra) and between (inter) industry spillovers. We find that both R&D and non-R&D-performing firms benefit from ‘between industry’ spillovers. We further show that firms with better access to finance achieve higher productivity, not only through their own R&D capital stock but also via both types of industry-level knowledge spillover. We allow for the two key sources of international spillovers namely import intensity and FDI. While import-intensive firms experience lower productivity, FDI mitigates this adverse productivity effect across knowledge-intensive exporting firms. The paper concludes that financially unconstrained firms and firms with greater corporate board connectedness derive positive industry-level spillover effects, reflecting intra- and inter-industry as domestic spillover or local value-chain effect in the literature on technological innovation

Systematic evaluation and external validation of 22 prognostic models among hospitalised adults with COVID-19: an observational cohort study.

The number of proposed prognostic models for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is growing rapidly, but it is unknown whether any are suitable for widespread clinical implementation.We independently externally validated the performance of candidate prognostic models, identified through a living systematic review, among consecutive adults admitted to hospital with a final diagnosis of COVID-19. We reconstructed candidate models as per original descriptions and evaluated performance for their original intended outcomes using predictors measured at the time of admission. We assessed discrimination, calibration and net benefit, compared to the default strategies of treating all and no patients, and against the most discriminating predictors in univariable analyses.We tested 22 candidate prognostic models among 411 participants with COVID-19, of whom 180 (43.8%) and 115 (28.0%) met the endpoints of clinical deterioration and mortality, respectively. Highest areas under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves were achieved by the NEWS2 score for prediction of deterioration over 24 h (0.78, 95% CI 0.73-0.83), and a novel model for prediction of deterioration <14 days from admission (0.78, 95% CI 0.74-0.82). The most discriminating univariable predictors were admission oxygen saturation on room air for in-hospital deterioration (AUROC 0.76, 95% CI 0.71-0.81), and age for in-hospital mortality (AUROC 0.76, 95% CI 0.71-0.81). No prognostic model demonstrated consistently higher net benefit than these univariable predictors, across a range of threshold probabilities.Admission oxygen saturation on room air and patient age are strong predictors of deterioration and mortality among hospitalised adults with COVID-19, respectively. None of the prognostic models evaluated here offered incremental value for patient stratification to these univariable predictors

A novel cohorting and isolation strategy for suspected COVID-19 cases during a pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic presents a significant infection prevention and control challenge. The admission of large numbers of patients with suspected COVID-19 disease risks overwhelming the capacity to protect other patients from exposure. The delay between clinical suspicion and confirmatory testing adds to the complexity of the problem. METHODS: We implemented a triage tool aimed at minimizing hospital-acquired COVID-19 particularly in patients at risk of severe disease. Patients were allocated to triage categories defined by likelihood of COVID-19 and risk of a poor outcome. Category A (low-likelihood; high-risk), B (high-likelihood; high-risk), C (high-likelihood; low-risk) and D (low-likelihood; low-risk). This determined the order of priority for isolation in single-occupancy rooms with Category A the highest. Patients in other groups were cohorted when isolation capacity was limited with additional interventions to reduce transmission. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients were evaluated with 79 (85%) receiving a COVID-19 diagnosis during their admission. Of those without a COVID-19 diagnosis: 10 were initially triaged to Category A; 0 to B; 1 to C and 4 to D. All high-risk patients requiring isolation were, therefore, admitted to single-occupancy rooms and protected from exposure. Twenty-eight (30%) suspected COVID-19 patients were evaluated to be low risk (groups C and D) and eligible for cohorting. No symptomatic hospital-acquired infections were detected in the cohorted patients. DISCUSSION: Application of a clinical triage tool to guide isolation and cohorting decisions may reduce the risk of hospital-acquired transmission of COVID-19 especially to individuals at the greatest of risk of severe disease

Clinical features and management of individuals admitted to hospital with monkeypox and associated complications across the UK: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The scale of the 2022 global mpox (formerly known as monkeypox) outbreak has been unprecedented. In less than 6 months, non-endemic countries have reported more than 67 000 cases of a disease that had previously been rare outside of Africa. Mortality has been reported as rare but hospital admission has been relatively common. We aimed to describe the clinical and laboratory characteristics and outcomes of individuals admitted to hospital with mpox and associated complications, including tecovirimat recipients. METHODS: In this cohort study, we undertook retrospective review of electronic clinical records and pathology data for all individuals admitted between May 6, and Aug 3, 2022, to 16 hospitals from the Specialist and High Consequence Infectious Diseases Network for Monkeypox. The hospitals were located in ten cities in England and Northern Ireland. Inclusion criteria were clinical signs consistent with mpox and MPXV DNA detected from at least one clinical sample by PCR testing. Patients admitted solely for isolation purposes were excluded from the study. Key outcomes included admission indication, complications (including pain, secondary infection, and mortality) and use of antibiotic and anti-viral treatments. Routine biochemistry, haematology, microbiology, and virology data were also collected. Outcomes were assessed in all patients with available data. FINDINGS: 156 individuals were admitted to hospital with complicated mpox during the study period. 153 (98%) were male and three (2%) were female, with a median age of 35 years (IQR 30-44). Gender data were collected from electronic patient records, which encompassed full formal review of clincian notes. The prespecified options for data collection for gender were male, female, trans, non-binary, or unknown. 105 (71%) of 148 participants with available ethnicity data were of White ethnicity and 47 (30%) of 155 were living with HIV with a median CD4 count of 510 cells per mm3 (IQR 349-828). Rectal or perianal pain (including proctitis) was the most common indication for hospital admission (44 [28%] of 156). Severe pain was reported in 89 (57%) of 156, and secondary bacterial infection in 82 (58%) of 142 individuals with available data. Median admission duration was 5 days (IQR 2-9). Ten individuals required surgery and two cases of encephalitis were reported. 38 (24%) of the 156 individuals received tecovirimat with early cessation in four cases (two owing to hepatic transaminitis, one to rapid treatment response, and one to patient choice). No deaths occurred during the study period. INTERPRETATION: Although life-threatening mpox appears rare in hospitalised populations during the current outbreak, severe mpox and associated complications can occur in immunocompetent individuals. Analgesia and management of superimposed bacterial infection are priorities for patients admitted to hospital. FUNDING: None