Buyer Beware Research Articles

Buyer beware: Using external providers to improve schools

Governments have injected billions of dollars into the massive school improvement industry, but little is known about the providers that offer services and whether their services actually improve schools. Bryan VanGronigen and Coby Meyers highlight their research the topic, which has found that few states monitor and evaluate provider performance and many state-approved or recommended providers offer services not based in or informed by research. They offer considerations for school, district, and state educational leaders about how to navigate some of the many challenges present within these murky waters.

“Buyer Beware” in AI Approaches to Imaging

Biomedical Safety & Standards 50(11):p 87, June 15, 2020. | DOI: 10.1097/01.BMSAS.0000668540.01918.0e

A justification for caveat emptor in the secondhand market: Risk transfer, enforcement cost and insurance

Caveat emptor (”let the buyer beware”) is the prevailing legal doctrine in sales transactions, especially in secondhand markets such as the residential housing market. In this paper, I provide one of the theoretical justifications for this legal doctrine. I mainly examine the doctrines of caveat venditor (”let the seller beware”) and caveat emptor and consider which doctrine better mitigates the adverse selection problem. I consider the secondhand market with risk-averse sellers and buyers; in this context, the risk transfer function plays an important role. Then, I reveal that caveat emptor outperforms caveat venditor, at least unless the legal enforcement cost is free.Furthermore, caveat emptor remains superior to caveat venditor when a third-party insurance contract is available. Insurance contracts are not as effective under caveat venditor as they are under caveat emptor.

Buyer Beware: Evidence-Based Evaluation of Dietary Supplements for Nephrolithiasis.

Introduction: Numerous dietary supplements claiming to treat or prevent kidney stones have recently been brought to the market. However, the evidence for these claims is not clear. This study assesses the scientific evidence supporting dietary supplements for the treatment and prevention of urinary stone disease. Materials and Methods: Two online marketplaces (Amazon and Google) were queried for dietary supplements available without a prescription to treat, alleviate, or prevent stone disease. Product labels were reviewed to compile stone-related claims and active ingredients. The 30-day cost of treatment and consumer star rating were assessed. MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were queried with labeled ingredients to assess the scientific evidence from published and lay sources. Results: A total of 27 dietary supplements containing 56 ingredients were analyzed. Supplements made a variety of claims, including dissolving stones (12 products, 44%), preventing stone formation (7 products, 26%), and reducing stone symptoms (6 products, 22%). Mean 30-day cost was $32 (range $4-$189). All products were rated highly by consumers (mean 4.2 of 5 stars). Of the 56 ingredients, 9 (16%) had any published studies for use in stone disease, and 5 (9%) had exclusively studies supporting their use. Eighteen scientific publications about the ingredients were identified, of which six showed mixed or no benefit in stone disease. Overall, 18 (67%) supplements contained ingredients with conflicting or absent evidence of benefit. No association was found between product cost or rating and products containing ingredients supported by human or animal studies (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Two-thirds of dietary supplements claiming to treat or prevent kidney stones contain ingredients with conflicting or no scientific evidence to support their claims. Clinicians should counsel stone formers that the effects of most supplements are unknown or unstudied in humans, and that the absence of evidence does not imply absence of potential harm.

Microbial Toxins in E-Liquid: A Potential New Vaping-Related Exposure to Explore.

Microbial Toxins in E-Liquid: A Potential New Vaping-Related Exposure to Explore.

Let the buyer beware: Content analysis of cosmetic surgery websites' provider information.

Given that many consumers do not understand any licensed physician can perform cosmetic surgery, cosmetic procedure advertising regulation is lacking and differs by state; and consumers often search for providers online and rely on the site's information. Cosmetic surgery websites have the potential to be a threat to consumers' safety and health. This study asked what types of physician information do cosmetic surgery websites supply. A content analysis was conducted with 873 physicians' information provided on cosmetic surgery websites in the top 10 cosmetic surgery cities, finding members of plastic surgery associations and core providers were more likely to list medical qualifications. All physicians were unlikely to list experience. Two-thirds stated their specific board certification, and 15% to 30% in each city failed to follow their state's regulations for disclosing board certification. The study concludes by suggesting national ethical guidelines.

Ruthless Sharing of Information

Ruthless Sharing of Information

Caveat Emptor: Predatory Publishers, Rogue Journals, and the Potential Corruption of Addiction Science

The name predatory publisher has been applied by academic librarian Jeffrey Beall to describe an open-access, scholarly publishing business model in which publication fees are charged to authors without providing the editorial judgment, peer-review process, and publishing services associated with more established journals. In the addiction field, as many as 20 journal titles now operate according to this model, and most of their editors are either nonexistent or impossible to contact. Although predatory publishing should not be equated with open access, this article argues that predatory publishers are diluting scientific quality in the addiction field by taking advantage of the open-access movement. Beyond the damage done to the reputations of naive authors and figurehead editorial board members, there is a cascade of effects resulting from the shabby publication process itself. If the addiction field is to be protected from predatory publishers, all sectors need to be involved. Declarations of "buyer beware" and "the emperor has no clothes" are just the first steps in a process of preventing further damage to the integrity of addiction science. As described in this article, concerted action will be required by authors, editors, and professional societies.

Two Centuries of Policing Swindles and Humbugs

Two Centuries of Policing Swindles and Humbugs Anne Fleming (bio) Edward J. Balleisen. Fraud: An American History from Barnum to Madoff. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 2017. xiv + 496 pp. $35.00. In 1865, P.T. Barnum observed that "there is no sort of object which men seek to attain … in which humbug is not very often an instrumentality."1 As the self-described Prince of Humbug, Barnum knew well the art of deception and its commercial value; his sales tactics often straddled the line between showmanship and fraud. Today, almost one hundred and fifty years later, Barnum's statement still rings true. Although much has changed in the way that commercial deception is policed, humbug remains an important tool for some modern American capitalists. Indeed, the American marketplace has never been nor will ever be entirely cleansed of fraud, as Edward Balleisen reports in his exciting new book Fraud: An American History from Barnum to Madoff. "No capitalist society will ever rid itself of clever, beguiling, charismatic flim-flammers, nor established firms that, in the face of new challenges, turn to deceptive marketing or dishonest accounting," Balleisen concludes (p. 383). He finds that commercial innovation and fraud have always been closely linked; new industries without established norms and standards of conduct consistently provide fertile ground for swindles and humbugs. Fraud chronicles the history of business fraud and its regulation over the past two hundred years, beginning in the early nineteenth century. Unlike previous works that focus on particular fraudsters or incidents of fraud, Balleisen casts a wide net that draws in examples from many corners of the world of commerce, including from the sale of securities, lightning rods, and other home improvement services, appliances, and medicine. An array of "capsule stories" illustrate the many varieties of business fraud and range of antifraud policing efforts over the past two centuries, as well as the similarities in approaches to fighting fraud across different domains of business within each era (p. 12). Although this method does not yield "clean plotlines" or deep explorations of central figures and events, it serves Balleisen's purpose well, which is to find the enduring patterns and "key inflection points" in the fight against business fraud, in addition to explaining the value of this history for [End Page 217] present-day policymaking (p. 12). Without lingering for long on the question of how we define "fraud," Balleisen provides historians and policymakers with a rich history of the machinery designed to stop and prevent it. Aside from the first two chapters, which offer an introduction and overview of the world of fraud, the remainder of the book explores the history of fraud policing in four parts. Each part corresponds to a different "phase" in the history of antifraud regulation: "A Nineteenth-Century World of Caveat Emptor (1810s to 1880s)," "Professionalization, Moralism, and the Elite Assault on Deception (1860s to 1930s)," "The Call for Investor and Consumer Protection (1930s to 1970s)," and "The Market Strikes Back (1970s to 2010s)." The first three phases chart a gradual shift away from the nineteenth century ethos of caveat emptor, "buyer beware," toward the mid-twentieth century mantra of caveat venditor, "seller beware." Over this period, reformers from within the state, the business community, and the "quasi-public domains between the two" fashioned new institutions and initiatives that became part of the "expanding web of antifraud regulation" that appeared between the 1860s and the 1970s (pp. 6–7). The final part then describes the "partial resurgence" of the caveat emptor ethos beginning in the mid-1970s, fueled by criticisms of excessive regulation from across the political spectrum and a "resurgent American antistatism" (p. 360). Within each part, most chapters proceed thematically, rather than chronologically. Part II chapter three, for example, maps the legal landscape of antifraud laws in the period from the end of the War of 1812 through Reconstruction, which corresponds to the lifespan of P. T. Barnum. The next chapter then describes private strategies for preventing fraud deployed during the same period, including the creation of new institutions for the collection and dissemination of information about commercial trickery for the business community and general public. The resulting chronology of fraud...

Limitations of pulmonary embolism ICD-10 codes in emergency department administrative data: let the buyer beware

BackgroundAdministrative data is a useful tool for research and quality improvement; however, validity of research findings based on these data depends on their reliability. Diagnoses assigned by physicians are subsequently converted by nosologists to ICD-10 codes (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision). Several groups have reported ICD-9 coding errors in inpatient data that have implications for research, quality improvement, and policymaking, but few have assessed ICD-10 code validity in ambulatory care databases. Our objective was to evaluate pulmonary embolism (PE) ICD-10 code accuracy in our large, integrated hospital system, and the validity of using these codes for operational and health services research using ED ambulatory care databases.MethodsAmbulatory care data for patients (age ≥ 18 years) with a PE ICD-10 code (I26.0 and I26.9) were obtained from the records of four urban EDs between July 2013 to January 2015. PE diagnoses were confirmed by reviewing medical records and imaging reports. In cases where chart diagnosis and ICD-10 code were discrepant, chart review was considered correct. Physicians’ written discharge diagnoses were also searched using ‘pulmonary embolism’ and ‘PE’, and patients who were diagnosed with PE but not coded as PE were identified. Coding discrepancies were quantified and described.ResultsOne thousand, four hundred and fifty-three ED patients had a PE ICD-10 code. Of these, 257 (17.7%) were false positive, with an incorrectly assigned PE code. Among the 257 false positives, 193 cases had ambiguous ED diagnoses such as ‘rule out PE’ or ‘query PE’, while 64 cases should have had non-PE codes. An additional 117 patients (8.90%) with a PE discharge diagnosis were incorrectly assigned a non-PE ICD-10 code (false negative group). The sensitivity of PE ICD-10 codes in this dataset was 91.1% (95%CI, 89.4–92.6) with a specificity of 99.9% (95%CI, 99.9–99.9). The positive and negative predictive values were 82.3% (95%CI, 80.3–84.2) and 99.9% (95%CI, 99.9–99.9), respectively.ConclusionsAmbulatory care data, like inpatient data, are subject to coding errors. This confirms the importance of ICD-10 code validation prior to use. The largest proportion of coding errors arises from ambiguous physician documentation; therefore, physicians and data custodians must ensure that quality improvement processes are in place to promote ICD-10 coding accuracy.

Exchange rate implications of Border Tax Adjustment Neutrality

Abstract This paper investigates the implications for the nominal exchange rate of a Border Tax Adjustment (BTA) when there is BTA neutrality. A border tax adjustment is a change from an origin-based system of taxation, that taxes exports but exempts imports to a destination-based system that taxes imports but exempts exports. Both indirect taxes (e.g. a VAT) and direct taxes (e.g. a cash-flow corporate profit tax) can be subject to a BTA. In the US, a BTA for the corporate profit tax is under discussion. There is BTA neutrality when the real equilibrium, including measures of profitability and competitiveness, of an open economy is unchanged when it moves from an origin-based to a destinationbased tax. The conventional wisdom on the exchange rate implications of a neutral BTA is that the currency of the country implementing the BTA will strengthen (appreciate) by a percentage equal to the VAT or CPT tax rate. The main insight of this note is that this ‘appreciation presumption’ is not robust, even when all conditions for full BTA neutrality are satisfied. Indeed, plausible alternative assumptions about constancy (or stickiness) of nominal prices support a weakening (depreciation) of the currency by the same percentage as the tax rate. On the basis on the very patchy available empirical information, it is not possible to take a view with any degree of confidence on the implications of a BTA for the nominal exchange rate, even if full BTA neutrality prevailed. Whether BTA neutrality itself is a feature of the real world is also a disputed empirical issue. Therefore, buyer (or seller) beware.

Caveat Emptor: The Accountabilities and Required Actions of Directors in Securing Value When Merging or Acquiring Companies. Paper 4 of 4: Conclusions on Research into What is Right Governance Practice Over M&A Transactions, as Overseen by Directors of the Acquiring Company

Caveat Emptor: The Accountabilities and Required Actions of Directors in Securing Value When Merging or Acquiring Companies. Paper 4 of 4: Conclusions on Research into What is Right Governance Practice Over M&A Transactions, as Overseen by Directors of the Acquiring Company

Paper 3B of 4: What Is Right Governance Practice Over M&A Transactions, as Overseen by the Directors of the Acquiring Company?

Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) are critical mechanisms for corporate growth and potentially for increased shareholder returns. The reality, however, often does not live up to the promise, as is borne out by empirical data on the high incidence rates of M&A under-performance. At present in Australia, directors and executive management, particularly of the acquiring company, have considerable latitude to put at-risk shareholder value via M&A without any meaningful pre-event restraints or post-event sanctions (and with the benefit of the Business Judgment Rule defence). The old adage caveat emptor (‘let the buyer beware’) still holds true for buyers, but when it comes to ensuring that their shareholders’ interests and capital are properly protected, there are few formally imposed ‘checks and balances’. Additionally, in terms of voluntary controls, there is little clarity on what are the acceptable, key activities and behaviours of the directors of the acquiring company, that represent responsible standards of conduct. The initial question to be considered is whether there is a discernible set of ‘right practices’ that provide a reference set of benchmarks for non-executive directors to know whether they are exercising the necessary care, diligence and skill in selecting and overseeing transactions. Looking from the ‘outside in’, the corollary is ‘How do shareholders in the acquiring company have some visibility and assurance that their executive management team and board are exercising (or have exercised) sufficient due diligence (in the broadest sense of the word) over transactions?’ The challenge thus arises as to how to describe the ‘right practice’ stewardship that should be exercised by ‘reasonable directors’ of the acquiring entity to manage the risks and performance of transactions – before, during and after acquisition. This paper is the third in a series of four that focus on identifying and describing ‘right governance’ i.e. the required level and mix of actions and responsibilities of directors of the acquiring company, necessary for protecting the interests of their shareholders. To carry out this research, and to shed light on these gaps in knowledge and required practices, three extant sources of knowledge – commercial, governance and legal literature – relating to M&A practice have been studied to understand what level of clarity it provides to non-executive directors. (This has been described in shorthand form as the t-ought for ‘theoretical ought’). It was hoped that this triangulation exercise would provide clear answers and an evidence based view as to what is right governance over M&A. it turned out that this triangulation exercise indicated a sizeable kludge gap at the intersection points. Subsequently the opinions and experiences have been elicited from a cross-section of non-executive directors and Chairmen, via targeted interviews (‘grounded research’) to capture their views on good board oversight of M&A practice. (This has been described in shorthand form as the d-ought for ‘directors’ ought’). What has emerged as the board-level themes from seasoned directors have been compared to the extant literature to examine how these align and whether there are any key gaps or contradictions. In most cases, there is alignment, although the interviewed directors’ views have crystallised what in the literature could best be described as ‘un-consolidated ideas’ based on ‘an extrapolation of managerial practices’, as the body of documented knowledge is generally not targeted at board members. From these comparisons, has arisen an emergent theory regarding ‘right practice’. The emergent theory points to six key themes that those directors interviewed believe make a difference to deal performance: (1) the Board’s degree of strategic thinking (‘Clear strategy upfront’); (2) planning and preparation (‘Early preparation and planning’); (3) the extent of board members’ cultural due-diligence (‘Proper understanding of culture’); (4) robust business-case scrutiny and investment assessment (‘Rigorous testing of the investment business case and funding strategy’); (5) their focus on tracking the delivery of the targeted benefits (‘Effective monitoring post transaction’); and (6) the quality of their mutual challenge and critical debate (‘Well-chaired board with constructive challenge’). This process of comparison of ‘t-ought’ versus ‘d-ought’ has indicated that these initial findings have merit and should be regarded as an emergent theory. The paper that follows is the third of a four-part series: • Paper 1 covered the commercial or practitioner M&A literature to see what guidance it provides directors involved in transactions • Paper 2 in similar fashion covered governance literature, again to seek guidance • Paper 3 covers the research findings flowing from director interviews into what is right governance (this paper is delivered in two parts, 3A and 3B, which are explained further below) • Paper 4 covers conclusions. Part A of the third paper follows below and covers directors' views of the need for board involvement in a range of M&A activities.

Regulatory roulette

Regulatory roulette

Generation of occurrence data on citrinin in food

Generation of occurrence data on citrinin in food

Violation of Consumer Rights by Electronic Media through Advertisements

This research paper attempts to evaluate the consumer rights and their violation by electronic media through advertisement. This is misguiding the consumer to buy harmful and unnecessary products. This research also aims at interpolating and ascertaining the onus of responsibility of a responsible media with regards to advertising. In the recent past the principle of “Caveat Emptor” which meant “Buyers beware” governed the relationship between a seller and buyer. In the era of open markets the buyer and seller came face to face, seller exhibited his goods, and buyer thoroughly examined them and then purchased them. The assumption would be consumer would use all his care and skill while entering into a transaction. The buyer to examine the goods before hand and most of the transactions are now concluded by correspondence. Discussion on consumer’s rights and their violation by media through advertisements is suggestive that consumers today enjoy a good amount of legal protection. But, even today, a large number of us remain exploited. Keywords: Consumer, Advertisement, Violation of Rights, Electronic Media legislation.

Ecological Civilization and the New Enlightenment

Ecological Civilization and the New Enlightenment

Caveat Emptor: The Accountabilities and Required Actions of Directors in Securing Value When Merging or Acquiring Companies. Paper 1 of 4: Review of Commercial or Practitioner M&A Literature to See What Guidance this Provides Directors Involved in Transactions

Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) are critical mechanisms for corporate growth and potentially for increased shareholder returns. The reality, however, often does not live up to the promise, as is borne out by empirical data on the high incidence rates of M&A under-performance. At present in Australia, directors and executive management, particularly of the acquiring company, have considerable latitude to put at-risk shareholder value via M&A without any meaningful pre-event restraints or post-event sanctions (and with the benefit of the Business Judgment Rule defence). The old adage caveat emptor (‘let the buyer beware’) still holds true for buyers, but when it comes to ensuring that their own shareholders’ interests and capital are properly protected, there are few formally imposed ‘checks and balances’. Additionally, in terms of voluntary controls, there is little clarity on what are the acceptable, key activities and behaviours of the directors of the acquiring company, that represent responsible standards of conduct. The initial question to be considered is whether there is a discernible set of ‘right practices’ that provide a reference set of benchmarks for non-executive directors to know whether they are exercising the necessary care, diligence and skill in selecting and overseeing transactions. Looking from the ‘outside in’, the corollary is ‘How do shareholders in the acquiring company have some visibility and assurance that their executive management team and board are exercising (or have exercised) sufficient due diligence (in the broadest sense of the word)?’ The challenge thus arises as to how to describe the ‘right practice’ stewardship that should be exercised by ‘reasonable directors’ of the acquiring entity to manage the risks and performance of transactions – before, during and after acquisition. This article is the first of a series of four that focus on identifying and describing ‘right governance’ i.e. the required level and mix of actions and responsibilities of directors of the acquiring company, necessary for protecting the interests of their shareholders. To carry out this research, and to shed light on these gaps in knowledge and required practices, the extant commercial, governance and legal literature relating to M&A practice has been studied to understand what level of clarity it provides to non-executive directors. (This has been described in shorthand form as the t-ought for ‘theoretical ought’). Subsequently, opinions and experiences have been elicited from a cross-section of non-executive directors and Chairmen, via targeted interviews (‘grounded research’) to capture their views on good board oversight of M&A practice. (This has been described in shorthand form as the d-ought for ‘directors’ ought’). What has emerged as the board-level themes from seasoned directors have been compared to the extant literature to examine how these align and whether there are any key gaps or contradictions. In most cases, there is alignment, although the interviewed directors’ views have crystallised what in the literature could best be described as ‘un-consolidated ideas’ based on ‘an extrapolation of managerial practices’, as the body of documented knowledge is generally not targeted at board members. From these comparison has arisen an emergent theory regarding ‘right practice’. The emergent theory points to six key themes that those directors interviewed believe make a difference to deal performance: (1) the Board’s degree of strategic thinking (‘Clear strategy upfront’); (2) planning and preparation (‘Early preparation and planning’); (3) the extent of board members’ cultural due-diligence (‘Proper understanding of culture’); (4) robust business-case scrutiny and investment assessment (‘Rigorous testing of the investment business case and funding strategy’); (5) their focus on tracking the delivery of the targeted benefits (‘Effective monitoring post transaction’); and (6) the quality of their mutual challenge and critical debate (‘Well-chaired board with constructive challenge’). This process of comparison of ‘t-ought’ versus ‘d-ought’ has indicated that these initial findings have merit and should be regarded as an emergent theory. The paper that follows is the first of a four-part series: • Paper 1 covers the commercial or practitioner M&A literature to seek what guidance this provides directors involved in transactions and to uncover any material gaps • Paper 2 in similar fashion covers governance literature, again to seek guidance and to uncover any material gaps • Paper 3 covers the findings of director interviews flowing from PhD research, regarding right M&A governance • Paper 4 covers conclusions. Paper 2 available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=2880427

Buyer Beware: How Market Structure Affects Contracting and Company Performance in the Private Military Industry

ABSTRACTPrivate military and security companies are integral components of the defense and intelligence operations of some of the world's most powerful states. Despite the increasingly pivotal role of contractors, analysts have yet to develop theories explaining when governments should outsource national security responsibilities or what conditions cause private defense markets to function efficiently. This inquiry addresses this gap in the literature by demonstrating that varying market structures—that is, the quantity of firms providing similar services and the number and purchasing power of those buying these services—have significant effects on costs, oversight, and company performance in the private defense industry. A principal–agent framework is developed to explain variation in the performance of firms in different markets across the industry. Evaluation of three private defense markets yields the surprising conclusion that monopsony, rather than a competitive market, is the ideal structure for governments outsourcing aspects of national defense.

Free‐range apps

Free‐range apps