Search

Introduction: Untreated bipolar disorder in pregnancy is associated with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Despite advances in clinical management, there is concern among obstetric providers and patients about the safety of pharmacological agents for the treatment of bipolar disorder in pregnancy. Recent studies have shown atypical antipsychotics and lamotrigine to have a favorable safety profile; however, little information is published on lurasidone. Objectives: The objective of this retrospective chart review was to evaluate pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in obstetric patients with bipolar disorder who are untreated, compared to those treated with lurasidone, other atypical antipsychotics, and lamotrigine at a tertiary teaching institution. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included neonates whose mothers had a diagnosis of bipolar disorder and were referred to the Maternal & Fetal Care Clinic with two documented visits after January 1, 2014, with delivery by October 31, 2017, within an SSM health‐system hospital. Results: In this study, women with untreated bipolar disorder (not on any mood stabilizer) in pregnancy had significantly higher rates of premature delivery and low birth weight compared to women on mood stabilizers of lamotrigine, lurasidone, and other atypical antipsychotics. No difference was observed for pregnancy or neonatal outcomes between patients taking any of the mood stabilizers. Conclusions: This study suggests that the use of lurasidone, other atypical antipsychotics, and lamotrigine have better neonatal outcomes than untreated bipolar disorder in pregnancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following the onset of COVID-19, research production in economics and finance (measured by the posting of working papers) increased by 29 |$\%$|⁠. Production increases were widespread across geographies, job titles, departments, and ages with larger increases in top departments and for people under the age of 35. Men and women both experienced production increases with the exception of women between the age of 35 and 49, who experienced no production gains despite large increases for men in the same age group. COVID-19 increased reliance on past coauthorship networks, with larger production gains for authors that are more central to the network. Authors have furnished an Internet Appendix , which is available on the Oxford University Press Web site next to the link to the final published paper online. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We survey a growing field studying aspects of finance that are potentially illegal, illicit, or immoral. Some of the literature is investigative in nature to uncover malfeasance that is recent and possibly ongoing. Other forensic finance research examines past events to generate a fuller understanding of the activities, economic magnitudes, incentives, and players involved. The work spans newer areas such as cryptocurrencies, financial advisor and broker misconduct, and greenwashing; and newer research in established fields that are still developing, such as insider trading, structured finance, market manipulation, political connections, public finance, and corporate fraud. We highlight investigative forensic finance, common economic questions, common empirical methods, industry and political opposition, censoring, and the importance of avoiding publication biases. Compared to other finance papers, forensic work has similar citations and SSRN downloads, and more media and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) citations. Along with prominent examples of industry reform and awareness, this highlights the potential for real-world impact. By laying out commonalities in research themes, questions, methods, and approaches across fields that may at first seem disparate, we hope to encourage more investigation of incentives and mechanisms in darker corners of finance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]