Is Financial Information Influencing the Reporting on SDGs? Empirical Evidence from Central and Eastern European Chemical Companies

Since the adoption of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) endorsed by United Nations in 2015, which envision an ambitious representation of what the world could look like in the upcoming years, companies have been employing different approaches to identify and report on their contributions to the SDGs, albeit facing various difficulties due to the goals’ novelty, legislative deficiencies, and the complexity of connections between SDGs and business performance. In this context, the relationship between sustainability practices and firms’ financial performance has attracted much attention among researchers. Consequently, this research is focusing on determining to what extent the financial indicators disclosed in the annual reports are impacting the quality of non-financial reporting based on SDGs in the case of chemical companies operating in Central and Eastern European countries (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia), within the time frame of 2015–2019. To reach our objective, a score-based content analysis was applied to assess the measure of SDGs achievement, and subsequently, the SDG score was used in multiple linear regression models with several financial data-based independent variables. The main findings highlight the companies’ contribution to the SDGs, particularly to those addressing the environment and decent work conditions for employees, and suggest that the research and development costs and other intangibles represent the most influential variable in explaining the variation in the firms’ SDG score. Academics, businesses and legislative bodies may find these results valuable in their corresponding activities: theoretical, pragmatic or statutory

Correction: Influence of socio-economic status on functional recovery after ARDS caused by SARS-CoV-2: the multicentre, observational RECOVIDS study

International audienc

Influence of socio-economic status on functional recovery after ARDS caused by SARS-CoV-2: the multicentre, observational RECOVIDS study

International audiencePurpose: Survivors after acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at high risk of developing respiratory sequelae and functional impairment. The healthcare crisis caused by the pandemic hit socially disadvantaged populations. We aimed to evaluate the influence of socio-economic status on respiratory sequelae after COVID-19 ARDS.Methods: We carried out a prospective multicenter study in 30 French intensive care units (ICUs), where ARDS survivors were pre-enrolled if they fulfilled the Berlin ARDS criteria. For patients receiving high flow oxygen therapy, a flow ≥ 50 l/min and an FiO2 ≥ 50% were required for enrollment. Socio-economic deprivation was defined by an EPICES (Evaluation de la Précarité et des Inégalités de santé dans les Centres d'Examens de Santé - Evaluation of Deprivation and Inequalities in Health Examination Centres) score ≥ 30.17 and patients were included if they performed the 6-month evaluation. The primary outcome was respiratory sequelae 6 months after ICU discharge, defined by at least one of the following criteria: forced vital capacity < 80% of theoretical value, diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide < 80% of theoretical value, oxygen desaturation during a 6-min walk test and fibrotic-like findings on chest computed tomography.Results: Among 401 analyzable patients, 160 (40%) were socio-economically deprived and 241 (60%) non-deprived; 319 (80%) patients had respiratory sequelae 6 months after ICU discharge (81% vs 78%, deprived vs non-deprived, respectively). No significant effect of socio-economic status was identified on lung sequelae (odds ratio (OR), 1.19 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72-1.97]), even after adjustment for age, sex, most invasive respiratory support, obesity, most severe P/F ratio (adjusted OR, 1.02 [95% CI 0.57-1.83]).Conclusions: In COVID-19 ARDS survivors, socio-economic status had no significant influence on respiratory sequelae 6 months after ICU discharge