Minimum Quality Standards in Baseball and the Paradoxical Disappearance of the .400 Hitter

This paper argues (following Gould, 2003) that the disappearance of the .400 hitter in major league baseball is due, not to a decrease in ability at the top end of the talent distribution, but to better methods of screening out players at the low end of the distribution. The argument is related to the economic literature on minimum quality standards in markets with imperfect information.

Complementary and Alternative Medicine and Pain Management

Over the past several years, there has been a growing interest in CAM therapies at UCHC. There are doctors, nurses, researchers and students all actively learning about, researching and using CAM modalities. Among them is Dr. Mitch Kennedy, the first Naturopathic Physician to treat patients at the University of Connecticut Health Center.

The Effects of Credit Risk on Dynamic Portfolio Management: A New Computational Approach

The study investigates the role of credit risk in a continuous time stochastic asset allocation model, since the traditional dynamic framework does not provide credit risk flexibility. The general model of the study extends the traditional dynamic efficiency framework by explicitly deriving the optimal value function for the infinite horizon stochastic control problem via a weighted volatility measure of market and credit risk. The model's optimal strategy was then compared to that obtained from a benchmark Markowitz-type dynamic optimization framework to determine which specification adequately reflects the optimal terminal investment returns and strategy under credit and market risks. The paper shows that an investor's optimal terminal return is lower than typically indicated under the traditional mean-variance framework during periods of elevated credit risk. Hence I conclude that, while the traditional dynamic mean-variance approach may indicate the ideal, in the presence of credit-risk it does not accurately reflect the observed optimal returns, terminal wealth and portfolio selection strategies.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of diabetes disease management programs

Context. Despite the rapid growth of disease management programs, there are still questions about their efficacy and effectiveness for improving patient outcomes and their ability to reduce costs associated with chronic disease. ^ Objective. To determine the effectiveness of disease management programs on improving the results of HbA1c tests, lipid profiles and systolic blood pressure (SBP) readings among diabetics. These three quantitative measures are widely accepted methods of determining the quality of a patient's diabetes management and the potential for future complications. ^ Data Sources. MEDLINE and CINAHL were searched from 1950 to June 2008 using MeSH terms designed to capture all relevant studies. Scopus pearling and hand searching were also done. Only English language articles were selected. ^ Study Selection. Titles and abstracts for the 2347 articles were screened against predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria, yielding 217 articles for full screening. After full article screening, 29 studies were selected for inclusion in the review. ^ Data Extraction. From the selected studies, data extraction included sample size, mean change over baseline, and standard deviation for each control and experimental arm. ^ Results. The pooled results show a mean HbA1c reduction of 0.64%, 95% CI (-0.83 to -0.44), mean SBP reduction of 7.39 mmHg (95% CI to -11.58 to -3.2), mean total cholesterol reduction of 5.74 mg/dL (95% CI, -10.01 to -1.43), and mean LDL cholesterol reduction of 3.74 mg/dL (95% CI, -8.34 to 0.87). Results for HbA1c, SBP and total cholesterol were statistically significant, while the results for LDL cholesterol were not. ^ Conclusions. The findings suggest that disease management programs utilizing five hallmarks of care can be effective at improving intermediate outcomes among diabetics. However, given the significant heterogeneity present, there may be fundamental differences with respect to study-specific interventions and populations that render them inappropriate for meta-analysis. ^