The goal of this investigation is to provide additional evidence concerning the incremental information content of the 10‐K from the aggregate market perspective. As in Foster and Vickrey (1978), the phrase, incremental information content of the 10‐K, refers to the information content of the data set in the 10‐K which is in excess of that which is contained in the related annual report to shareholders and other preceding announcements such as earnings releases. The statistical procedures seem to imply that the 10‐K did not, in general, possess incremental information content from the aggregate perspective for the firms considered herein.

IntroductionThe goal of this study was to examine patterns in the likelihood of consent to genetic research among participants in a prospective kidney disease cohort and biobank, and to determine demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic factors linked to consent for ongoing and future genetic research.MethodsThe Clinical Phenotyping Resource and Biobank Core (C-PROBE) enrolled 1628 adult and pediatric patients with chronic kidney disease from 2009 to 2017 across 7 sites in the United States. Participants were asked at annual study visits for consent to provide DNA samples for future genetic studies. We compared characteristics of participants by initial consent outcome and consent status at their most recent study visit.ResultsOf the C-PROBE participants, 96% consented to genetic studies at their initial study visit. Although African Americans were slightly less likely to consent at baseline (93% vs. 97%, odds ratio = 0.3, P < 0.02), there were no significant racial or ethnic differences with longitudinal participation. Also, pediatric and adult genetic consent rates were equivalent. The major persistent differences in the likelihood of consent were based on enrollment site, which ranged from 85% to 100% (P < 0.0001).ConclusionOverall, genetic consent rates for kidney research within the C-PROBE cohort were high. However, differences in consent rates over time and by recruitment site highlight the complexity of genetic consent for biobanking, and potential limitations for generalizability of observations.

This paper examined the amount bias in standard errors for fixed effects when the random part of a multilevel model is misspecified. Study 1 examined the effects of misspecification for a model with one Level 1 predictor. Results indicated that misspecifying random slope variance as fixed had a moderate effect size on the standard errors of the fixed effects and had a greater effect than misspecifying fixed slopes as random. In Study 2, a second Level 1 predictor was added and allowed for the examination of the effects of misspecifying the slope variance of one predictor on the standard errors for the fixed effects of the other predictor. Results indicated that only the standard errors of coefficient relevant to that predictor were impacted and that the effect size for the bias could be considered moderate to large. These results suggest that researchers can use a piecemeal approach to testing multilevel models with random effects.