The potential for bias in reporting of industry-sponsored clinical trials

Concerns about potentially misleading reporting of pharmaceutical industry research have surfaced many times. The potential for duality (and thereby conflict) of interest is only too clear when you consider the sums of money required for the discovery, development and commercialization of new medicines. As the ability of major, mid-size and small pharmaceutical companies to innovate has waned, as evidenced by the seemingly relentless decline in the numbers of new medicines approved by Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency year-on-year, not only has the cost per new approved medicine risen: so too has the public and media concern about the extent to which the pharmaceutical industry is open and honest about the efficacy, safety and quality of the drugs we manufacture and sell. In 2005 an Editorial in Journal of the American Medical Association made clear that, so great was their concern about misleading reporting of industry-sponsored studies, henceforth no article would be published that was not also guaranteed by independent statistical analysis. We examine the precursors to this Editorial, as well as its immediate and lasting effects for statisticians, for the manner in which statistical analysis is carried out, and for the industry more generally.

Model inter-comparison between statistical and dynamic model assessments of the long-term stability of blanket peat in Great Britain (1940-2099)

We compared output from 3 dynamic process-based models (DMs: ECOSSE, MILLENNIA and the Durham Carbon Model) and 9 bioclimatic envelope models (BCEMs; including BBOG ensemble and PEATSTASH) ranging from simple threshold to semi-process-based models. Model simulations were run at 4 British peatland sites using historical climate data and climate projections under a medium (A1B) emissions scenario from the 11-RCM (regional climate model) ensemble underpinning UKCP09. The models showed that blanket peatlands are vulnerable to projected climate change; however, predictions varied between models as well as between sites. All BCEMs predicted a shift from presence to absence of a climate associated with blanket peat, where the sites with the lowest total annual precipitation were closest to the presence/absence threshold. DMs showed a more variable response. ECOSSE predicted a decline in net C sink and shift to net C source by the end of this century. The Durham Carbon Model predicted a smaller decline in the net C sink strength, but no shift to net C source. MILLENNIA predicted a slight overall increase in the net C sink. In contrast to the BCEM projections, the DMs predicted that the sites with coolest temperatures and greatest total annual precipitation showed the largest change in carbon sinks. In this model inter-comparison, the greatest variation in model output in response to climate change projections was not between the BCEMs and DMs but between the DMs themselves, because of different approaches to modelling soil organic matter pools and decomposition amongst other processes. The difference in the sign of the response has major implications for future climate feedbacks, climate policy and peatland management. Enhanced data collection, in particular monitoring peatland response to current change, would significantly improve model development and projections of future change.

Bioclimatic envelope model of climate change impacts on blanket peatland distribution in Great Britain

Blanket peatlands are rain-fed mires that cover the landscape almost regardless of topography. The geographical extent of this type of peatland is highly sensitive to climate. We applied a global process-based bioclimatic envelope model, PeatStash, to predict the distribution of British blanket peatlands. The model captures the present areal extent (Kappa = 0.77) and is highly sensitive to both temperature and precipitation changes. When the model is run using the UKCIP02 climate projections for the time periods 2011–2040, 2041–2070 and 2071–2100, the geographical distribution of blanket peatlands gradually retreats towards the north and the west. In the UKCIP02 high emissions scenario for 2071–2100, the blanket peatland bioclimatic space is ~84% smaller than contemporary conditions (1961–1990); only parts of the west of Scotland remain inside this space. Increasing summer temperature is the main driver of the projected changes in areal extent. Simulations using 7 climate model outputs resulted in generally similar patterns of declining aereal extent of the bioclimatic space, although differing in degree. The results presented in this study should be viewed as a first step towards understanding the trends likely to affect the blanket peatland distribution in Great Britain. The eventual fate of existing blanket peatlands left outside their bioclimatic space remains uncertain.

Explaining deviations from NAV in UK property companies: rationality and sentimentality

One of the most vexing issues for analysts and managers of property companies across Europe has been the existence and persistence of deviations of Net Asset Values of property companies from their market capitalisation. The issue has clear links to similar discounts and premiums in closed-end funds. The closed end fund puzzle is regarded as an important unsolved problem in financial economics undermining theories of market efficiency and the Law of One Price. Consequently, it has generated a huge body of research. Although it can be tempting to focus on the particular inefficiencies of real estate markets in attempting to explain deviations from NAV, the closed end fund discount puzzle indicates that divergences between underlying asset values and market capitalisation are not a ‘pure’ real estate phenomenon. When examining potential explanations, two recurring factors stand out in the closed end fund literature as often undermining the economic rationale for a discount – the existence of premiums and cross-sectional and periodic fluctuations in the level of discount/premium. These need to be borne in mind when considering potential explanations for real estate markets. There are two approaches to investigating the discount to net asset value in closed-end funds: the ‘rational’ approach and the ‘noise trader’ or ‘sentiment’ approach. The ‘rational’ approach hypothesizes the discount to net asset value as being the result of company specific factors relating to such factors as management quality, tax liability and the type of stocks held by the fund. Despite the intuitive appeal of the ‘rational’ approach to closed-end fund discounts the studies have not successfully explained the variance in closed-end fund discounts or why the discount to net asset value in closed-end funds varies so much over time. The variation over time in the average sector discount is not only a feature of closed-end funds but also property companies. This paper analyses changes in the deviations from NAV for UK property companies between 2000 and 2003. The paper present a new way to study the phenomenon ‘cleaning’ the gearing effect by introducing a new way of calculating the discount itself. We call it “ungeared discount”. It is calculated by assuming that a firm issues new equity to repurchase outstanding debt without any variation on asset side. In this way discount does not depend on an accounting effect and the analysis should better explain the effect of other independent variables.