Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in AbstractThis paper examines the post-War Summer and Winter Olympic Games in order to determine the economic and political determinants of national participation, of female participation in particular, and of success at the Games (i.e., medal counts). Compared to the Summer Games, Winter participation levels are driven more by income and less by population, have less host nation bias and a greater effect of climate. Roughly similar factors determine medal count success, although single party and communist regimes win far more medals (and gold medals) in both seasons than can be attributed to other factors. We find no large significant differences between types of athletic events (e.g. luge versus nordic skiing). We estimate that major participating nations requires a $260 rise in income per capita to send an extra participant. Similarly the "cost" of an extra medal is $1700 per capita and $4750 per capita for an additional gold medal. Predictions for participation and medal counts (including gold medals in particular) for the 2002 Salt Lake City Games are presented as a test of our analysis.

Please refer to published version for the most recent bibliographic citation information. If a published version is known of, the repository item page linked to above, will contain details on accessing it.

Abstract:Objective: To determine, through a review of the medical literature and author contact, the role of clinicians in the discovery of off label use of Food and Drug Administration approved prescription drugs Data Sources: The literature was accessed through MEDLINE (1999( -December 2003.Additional sources accessed included the U.S. Patent Office and Micromedex, Thompson Scientific and Healthcare, Inc.Data Synthesis: A survey of new therapeutic uses for "New Molecular Entity" drugs approved in 1998 was conducted for the subsequent 5 years of commercial availability. During that time period, a total of 144 new applications were identified in a computerized search of the literature for the 29 new drugs approved in 1998. Literature and patent searches were conducted to identify the first report of each new application. Authors of the seminal articles were contacted via survey and telephone interview to determine whether they were in fact the originators of the new applications. If they were, examinations of article contents and author surveys were used to explore whether each new application was discovered via clinical practice that was independent of pharmaceutical company or university research ("field discovery") or whether the discovery was made by or with the involvement of pharmaceutical firm or university researchers ("central discovery"). Conclusions:Post-NDA discoveries of new, off-label uses for new drugs were present in 22 of the 29 drugs in our sample. We found that 59% (85/144) of the drug therapy innovations in our 4 sample were discovered by practicing clinicians via field discovery. The major role of clinicians in the discovery of new, off-label drug therapies has not been previously documented or explored. We propose that this finding has important regulatory and health policy implications. 5

No abstract