Higher ethical objective (Maqasid al-Shari'ah) augmented framework for Islamic banks : assessing the ethical performance and exploring its determinants.

This study utilises higher objectives postulated in Islamic moral economy or the maqasid al-Shari’ah theoretical framework’s novel approach in evaluating the ethical, social, environmental and financial performance of Islamic banks. Maqasid al-Shari’ah is interpreted as achieving social good as a consequence in addition to well-being and, hence, it goes beyond traditional (voluntary) social responsibility. This study also explores the major determinants that affect maqasid performance as expressed through disclosure analysis. By expanding the traditional maqasid al-Shari’ah,, we develop a comprehensive evaluation framework in the form of a maqasid index, which is subjected to a rigorous disclosure analysis. Furthermore, in identifying the main determinants of the maqasid disclosure performance, panel data analysis is used by including several key variables alongside political and socio-economic environment, ownership structures, and corporate and Shari’ah governance-related factors. The sample includes 33 full-fledged Islamic banks from 12 countries for the period of 2008–2016. The findings show that although during the nine-year period the disclosure of maqasid performance of the sampled Islamic banks has improved, this is still short of ‘best practices’. Through panel data analysis, this study finds that the Muslim population indicator, CEO duality, Shari’ah governance, and leverage variables positively impact the disclosure of maqasid performance. However, the effect of GDP, financial development and human development index of the country, its political and civil rights, institutional ownership, and a higher share of independent directors have an overall negative impact on the maqasid performance. The findings reported in this study identify complex and multi-faceted relations between external market realities, corporate and Shari’ah governance mechanisms, and maqasid performance

Family history of cancer and the risk of squamous cell carcinoma of oesophagus: A case-control study in Kashmir, India

Background: Only a few studies have examined the association between family history of cancer (FHC) and the risk of oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in high incidence areas of ESCC. We conducted a case-control study to evaluate the relationship between FHC and ESCC risk in Kashmir, India, with analysis of detailed epidemiological data and information on multiple gene polymorphisms.Methods: We collected detailed information on FHC and a number of socio-demographic and lifestyle factors, and also obtained blood samples for genetic analysis from 703 histopathologically confirmed ESCC cases and 1664 individually matched controls. Conditional logistic regression models were used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).Results: Participants who had FHC showed a strong association with ESCC risk, and the risk was stronger when first-degree relatives (FDRs) had FHC (OR=6.8; 95% CI=4.6-9.9). Having a sibling with a cancer showed the strongest association (OR=10.8; 95% CI=6.0-19.3), but having a child with a cancer was not associated with ESCC risk. A history of any cancer in the spouse was also associated with ESCC risk (OR=4.1; 95% CI=1.6-10.2). Those with two or more relatives with FHC were at a higher risk of ESCC. After restricting FHC to familial ESCC only, the above associations were strengthened, except when spouses were affected with ESCC (OR=2.5; 95% CI=0.7-8.9). When we examined the associations between several single-nucleotide polymorphisms and ESCC in those with and without FHC, the associations of variant genotypes in cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19 and CYP2D6 and the wild genotype of CYP2E1 with ESCC were much stronger in those with FHC. The FHC had an additive interaction with several risk factors of ESCC in this population.Conclusion: Our results showed that FHC was strongly associated with ESCC risk in Kashmir. It seems both genetic factors and shared environment are involved in this association. © 2015 Cancer Research UK. All rights reserved

Evaluation of prognostic risk models for postoperative pulmonary complications in adult patients undergoing major abdominal surgery: a systematic review and international external validation cohort study

Background Stratifying risk of postoperative pulmonary complications after major abdominal surgery allows clinicians to modify risk through targeted interventions and enhanced monitoring. In this study, we aimed to identify and validate prognostic models against a new consensus definition of postoperative pulmonary complications. Methods We did a systematic review and international external validation cohort study. The systematic review was done in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched MEDLINE and Embase on March 1, 2020, for articles published in English that reported on risk prediction models for postoperative pulmonary complications following abdominal surgery. External validation of existing models was done within a prospective international cohort study of adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing major abdominal surgery. Data were collected between Jan 1, 2019, and April 30, 2019, in the UK, Ireland, and Australia. Discriminative ability and prognostic accuracy summary statistics were compared between models for the 30-day postoperative pulmonary complication rate as defined by the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine Core Outcome Measures in Perioperative and Anaesthetic Care (StEP-COMPAC). Model performance was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCC). Findings In total, we identified 2903 records from our literature search; of which, 2514 (86·6%) unique records were screened, 121 (4·8%) of 2514 full texts were assessed for eligibility, and 29 unique prognostic models were identified. Nine (31·0%) of 29 models had score development reported only, 19 (65·5%) had undergone internal validation, and only four (13·8%) had been externally validated. Data to validate six eligible models were collected in the international external validation cohort study. Data from 11 591 patients were available, with an overall postoperative pulmonary complication rate of 7·8% (n=903). None of the six models showed good discrimination (defined as AUROCC ≥0·70) for identifying postoperative pulmonary complications, with the Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia score showing the best discrimination (AUROCC 0·700 [95% CI 0·683–0·717]). Interpretation In the pre-COVID-19 pandemic data, variability in the risk of pulmonary complications (StEP-COMPAC definition) following major abdominal surgery was poorly described by existing prognostication tools. To improve surgical safety during the COVID-19 pandemic recovery and beyond, novel risk stratification tools are required. Funding British Journal of Surgery Society