Suchergebnisse

Medical Practice Variations: Where Are We?; T.FolmerAndersen & G.Mooney -- Why Do Variations Occur?; K.McPherson -- Variations in Outcomes Research; L.L.Roos et al -- Medical Decision Making and Practice Variation; A.G.Mulley, Jr. -- Equity and Variability in Modern Health Care; G.Bevan -- Measuring Performance in the Health Care Sector: The Whys and the Hows; A.McGuire -- The Dog in the Night Time: Medical Practice Variations and Health Policy; R.G.Evans -- Variations from a Lay Perspective; F.Vestergaard -- On the Need for Outcomes -- Research and the Prospects for the Evaluative Clinical Sciences; J.E.Wennberg -- Promoting Clinical Policy Change: Using the Art to Promote the Science in Medicine; J.Lomas -- Challenges Facing Modern Health Care: A Need for Change; G.Mooney & T.Folmer Andersen -- Index.

This paper provides a selective summary of recent work that has documented the usefulness of high‐frequency, intraday return series in exploring issues related to the more commonly studied daily or lower‐frequency returns. We show that careful modeling of intraday data helps resolve puzzles and shed light on controversies in the extant volatility literature that are difficult to address with daily data. Among other things, we provide evidence on the interaction between market microstructure features in the data and the prevalence of strong volatility persistence, the source of significant day‐of‐the‐week effect in daily returns, the apparent poor forecast performance of daily volatility models, and the origin of long‐memory characteristics in daily return volatility series.

Societies worldwide are investing considerable resources into the safe development and use of nanomaterials. Although each of these protective efforts is crucial for governing the risks of nanomaterials, they are insufficient in isolation. What is missing is a more integrative governance approach that goes beyond legislation. Development of this approach must be evidence based and involve key stakeholders to ensure acceptance by end users. The challenge is to develop a framework that coordinates the variety of actors involved in nanotechnology and civil society to facilitate consideration of the complex issues that occur in this rapidly evolving research and development area. Here, we propose three sets of essential elements required to generate an effective risk governance framework for nanomaterials. (1) Advanced tools to facilitate risk-based decision making, including an assessment of the needs of users regarding risk assessment, mitigation, and transfer. (2) An integrated model of predicted human behavior and decision making concerning nanomaterial risks. (3) Legal and other (nano-specific and general) regulatory requirements to ensure compliance and to stimulate proactive approaches to safety. The implementation of such an approach should facilitate and motivate good practice for the various stakeholders to allow the safe and sustainable future development of nanotechnology.

Societies worldwide are investing considerable resources into the safe development and use of nanomaterials. Although each of these protective efforts is crucial for governing the risks of nanomaterials, they are insufficient in isolation. What is missing is a more integrative governance approach that goes beyond legislation. Development of this approach must be