Webinar on the new
Ph.D. Job Market, hosted by the AEA ad hoc Committee on the Job Market |
August 25, 2020 *********** The communications page includes the following:
|
Wednesday, August 26, 2020
Information from the AEA on this year's new Ph.D. job market
Tuesday, August 25, 2020
Surrogacy and citizenship in the U.S.
Some rules seem clear: anyone born in the U.S. is an American citizen, as is any child of an American parent. But in these partisan times, even clear rules are subject to argument, and questionable distinctions can be brought up to litigate old repugnances.
ABC has the story:
State Dept. fighting to deny US citizenship to gay couple's child: A federal judge ruled in June that the agency had to grant citizenship. By Conor Finnegan
"The State Department is appealing a federal judge's decision that it must recognize the U.S. citizenship of a young girl born via surrogate to a gay couple -- prolonging one of many legal fights over its controversial policy that was deemed unconstitutional in June.
"Roee Kiviti and Adiel Kiviti of Chevy Chase, Maryland, are legally married and both U.S. citizens. Their daughter Kessem was born in Canada via a surrogate, so the State Department has argued in federal court that she is "born out of wedlock" and not entitled to birthright citizenship.
...
"The Kiviti's are not the only family in a legal battle with the department on this issue.
"According to Immigration Equality, Derek Mize and Jonathan Gregg, a gay couple in Atlanta, are also awaiting a ruling by a federal judge over their daughter Simone's citizenship.
"The group also represents Allison Stefania and Lucas Zaccari -- a lesbian couple fighting for their daughter's citizenship. She was born to Lucas, an Italian citizen, via in vitro fertilization, so the State Department ruled she was born out of wedlock to a non-U.S. citizen, disregarding Allison's U.S. citizenship and their marriage. The couple is also awaiting a decision."
HT: Kim Krawiec
Monday, August 24, 2020
The Canadian Resident Matching Service: a history
Here's a brief history of the Canadian medical residency match:
Gallinger J, Ouellette M, Peters E, Turriff L. CaRMS at 50: Making the match for medical education [Les 50 ans du CaRMS: jumelage pour l’éducation médicale]. Can Med Educ J. 2020;11(3):e133-e140. Published 2020 Jul 15. doi:10.36834/cmej.69786
Abstract: "Entry into postgraduate medical training in Canada is facilitated through a national application and matching system which establishes matches between applicants and training programs based on each party’s stated preferences.
"Health human resource planning in Canada involves many factors, influences, and decisions. The complexity of the system is due, in part, to the fact that much of the decision making is dispersed among provincial, territorial, regional, and federal jurisdictions, making a collaborative national approach a challenge. The national postgraduate application and matching system is one of the few aspects of the health human resources continuum that is truly pan-Canadian.
"This article examines the evolution of the application and matching system over the past half century, the values that underpin it, and CaRMS' role in the process."
Sunday, August 23, 2020
More on Deceased donors as non‐directed donors in kidney exchange chains
I anticipate that we will be reading more in the future about kidney exchange chains started by a deceased donor kidney. In the meantime, here are two recent papers:
From the American Journal of Transplantation:
Deceased donors as non‐directed donors in kidney paired donation
This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi:10.1111/ajt.16268
Abstract
As proof of concept, we simulate a revised kidney allocation system that includes deceased donor (DD) kidneys as chain‐initiating kidneys (DD‐CIK) in a kidney paired donation pool (KPDP), and estimate potential increases in number of transplants. We consider chains of length 2 in which the DD‐CIK gives to a candidate in the KPDP, and that candidate’s incompatible donor donates to the deceased donor (DD) waitlist. In simulations, we vary initial pool size, arrival rates of candidate/donor pairs and (living) non‐directed donors (NDDs), and delay time from entry to the KPDP until a candidate is eligible to receive a DD‐CIK. Using data on candidate/donor pairs and NDDs from the Alliance for Paired Kidney Donation, and the actual DDs from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) data, simulations extend over two years. With an initial pool of 400, respective candidate and NDD arrival rates of two per day and 3 per month, and delay times for access to DD‐CIK of 6 months or less, including DD‐CIKs increases the number of transplants by at least 447 over two years, and greatly reduces waiting times of KPDP candidates. Potential effects on waitlist candidates are discussed as are policy and ethical issues.
************
And from Transplant International:
Lucrezia Furian Antonio Nicolò Caterina Di Bella Massimo Cardillo Emanuele Cozzi Paolo Rigotti
First published: 09 August 2020 https://doi.org/10.1111/tri.13712
This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi:10.1111/tri.13712
PDFPDFTOOLS SHARE
Abstract: "Kidney paired donation (KPD) is a valuable way to overcome immunological incompatibility in the context of living donation, and several strategies have been implemented to boost its development. In this article, we reviewed the current state of the art in this field, with a particular focus on advanced KPD strategies, including the most recent idea of initiating living donor (LD) transplantation chains with a deceased‐donor (DD) kidney, first applied successfully in 2018. Since then, Italy has been running a national program in which a chain‐initiating kidney is selected from a DD pool and allocated to a recipient with an incompatible LD, and the LD’s kidney is transplanted into a patient on the waiting list (WL).
"At this stage, since the ethical and logistic issues have been managed appropriately, KPD starting with a DD has proved to be a feasible strategy. It enables transplants in recipients of incompatible pairs without the need for desensitizing and also benefits patients on the WL who are allocated chain‐ending kidneys from LDs (prioritizing sensitized patients and those on the WL for longer)."
****************
Previous posts:
Monday, October 14, 2019 A kidney exchange chain initiated by a deceased donor, in Italy
Tuesday, September 5, 2017 UNOS proposal: Allowing Deceased Donor-Initiated Kidney Paired Donation (KPD) Chains
Monday, April 11, 2016 Using deceased donor kidneys to start living donor kidney exchange chains
- M. L. Melcher1,
- J. P. Roberts2,*,
- A. B. Leichtman3,
- A. E. Roth4 and
- M. A. Rees
Saturday, August 22, 2020
Organs for sale
Given the heated discussions and intense repugnance that often accompany questions concerning compensation for organs, you might be surprised to find an American Organ Clearing House that has a section devoted to Organs for Sale.
The site appears to get a lot of support from religious institutions
Needless to say, although money plays an important role, this kind of commerce still involves a good deal of matching.
"There is more to placing a pipe organ than checking physical dimensions. We will work with you to choose an instrument appropriate for the acoustics, liturgy, and other activities of your church."
Friday, August 21, 2020
Brain death (death by neurological criteria)
Defining human life is hard, but defining death used to be easy: no heartbeat or respiration. That changed with modern technology--e.g. a patient in the midst of a heart transplant may have no heart, but may have a long life ahead.
And of course, if we are who we think we are, it is brain death that matters most: loss of heartbeat and respiration kills our brains, our selves. But defining brain death is not so easy, especially for a patient on a ventilator who may have a pulse and be visibly breathing.
A recent discussion in JAMA seeks to standardize definitions of brain death, which are of more than academic interest, because deceased donor organ transplantation mostly goes on after brain death but while the organs are still receiving oxygen from (artificially maintained) heartbeat and respiration.
Greer DM, Shemie SD, Lewis A, et al. Determination of Brain Death/Death by Neurologic Criteria: The World Brain Death Project. JAMA. Published online August 03, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.11586
"The concepts of life and death have always been complicated, but ever more so as medical and technological advances continue to extend the limits to saving life and prolonging physiological function. For previous generations, cardiorespiratory death was the sole clinical definition of death, often without any standard criteria, leading to the risk of misdiagnosis. As resuscitation techniques and mechanical ventilation developed, a new definition of death was needed.
"The idea of brain death/death by neurologic criteria (BD/DNC) was first recognized in 1959 as “coma depassé”1 and subsequently described as “brain death” with the first published clinical definition in 1968, commonly known as the Harvard Brain Death Criteria.2 Since then, many other guidelines and protocols have been published, adopted, and revised throughout the world with general acceptance of the concept of BD/DNC among medical groups, major religions, and governments.3
'However, there continues to be confusion and dilemmas that arise regarding BD/DNC. The wide variance in practice reflects this confusion and numerous other challenges. Inconsistencies in concept, criteria, practice, and documentation exist internationally and within countries.3,4 Difficulties in conducting randomized clinical trials and large-scale studies on BD/DNC have resulted in a lack of robust data from which to develop evidence-based recommendations. Challenges to the validity of BD/DNC continue to promote controversy. These factors initiated this project to harmonize practice and improve the rigor of BD/DNC determination."
**********
Here's an earlier take, with a more philosophical slant:
Sarbey, Ben. “Definitions of death: brain death and what matters in a person.” Journal of law and the biosciences vol. 3,3 743-752. 20 Nov. 2016, doi:10.1093/jlb/lsw054
Here are the concluding sentences:
"The neurological criteria for death represent a remarkable advance in our ways of responding to changes in death and dying. However, as medical technology and life extension techniques develop, we must also develop increasingly precise notions of what aspects of our neurological lives are the most important. While the current total brain death standard currently suffices in the vast majority of cases, the standard does not fully line up with what we value in persons. Should we retain the current brain death standard despite its mismatch with our values and despite negative consequences in determining death and in organ donation? Technological advances seem as if they will inevitably make this question inescapable."
Thursday, August 20, 2020
Opioid deaths in Canada during the pandemic, and what to do about it.
Canada has a different political culture than the U.S., and attitudes towards drug abuse are one place in which that shows through clearly.
The Washington Post has the story--drug overdoses have risen during the pandemic:
By Amanda Coletta
"a growing chorus, including top public health officials, the premier of British Columbia and the nation’s police chiefs, is calling on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to decriminalize the possession of illicit drugs for personal use.
...
"British Columbia, the epicenter of the crisis, recorded its deadliest month in May — and then surpassed it in June. Nearly four times as many people in the province have died of a suspected overdose this year as have died of the coronavirus.
...
"Border closures have disrupted drug markets, making the street supply more unpredictable and toxic. Authorities have urged people to stay at home, pushing some to use drugs alone, without anyone nearby to help when dosages go wrong. Some supervised consumption sites and treatment centers have reduced operations, cutting people off from support networks.
...
"For the pandemic, officials have marshaled extraordinary financial resources and provided daily updates. Lawmakers have stood side-by-side with public health officials, largely deferring to their advice.
"But they’ve not always backed the remedies those same officials have offered to fight overdoses.
...
"“The most important thing we can do is make it okay for people to talk about their drug use and to seek assistance for it,” Henry said. “Labeling somebody a criminal is one of those major barriers that keeps people hiding and afraid and ashamed.”
...
"That followed an extraordinary endorsement from the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, which said police resources would be better spent on cracking down on drug trafficking, illegal production and importation than on pursuing users.
"The chiefs said that arresting people for simple possession has been “ineffective” and that police should instead direct users to social services and health care, which could reduce recidivism and ancillary crimes."
Wednesday, August 19, 2020
The ethics (and some economics) of paying participants in Human Infection Challenge Studies, for a coronavirus vaccine
Here's a paper (that is perhaps not too long when you divide by the number of authors) seeking to provide some background for payment decisions in connection with human infection studies (i.e. challenge trials) of covid-19 vaccines.
Lynch, Holly Fernandez and Darton, Thomas and Largent, Emily and Levy, Jae and McCormick, Frank and Ogbogu, Ubaka and Payne, Ruth and Roth, Alvin E. and Jefferson Shah, Akilah and Smiley, Thomas, Ethical Payment to Participants in Human Infection Challenge Studies, with a Focus on SARS-CoV-2: Report and Recommendations (August 14, 2020).
Abstract: To prepare for potential human infection challenge studies (HICS) involving SARS-CoV-2, this report offers an expert analysis of ethical approaches to paying research participants in these studies, as well as HICS more broadly. The report first provides an overarching ethical framework for research payment that divides payment into reimbursement, compensation, and incentive, focusing on fairness and promoting adequate recruitment and retention as counterweights to ethical concerns about undue inducement. It then describes variables relevant to applying this framework to any type of study, including the prospect of direct medical benefit, early participant withdrawal, study setting and location, pandemic circumstances, study budget, and participant perspectives. We conclude that there is no need for a unique payment framework specific to HICS or SARS-CoV-2 HICS, but that there may be features of particular relevance to ethical payment for these studies. Participants have varied motivations for enrolling in HICS, including financial considerations, altruism, and other interests, but undue inducement does not seem to be a significant problem based on available evidence. Payment in these studies should reflect the nature of participant confinement, anticipated discomfort from induced infection, risks and uncertainty, participant motivations, and the need to recruit from certain populations, as relevant. Where HICS involve significant risks and highly contingent social value, special review confirming the ethical permissibility of these studies can help promote confidence in the ethical permissibility of offers of payment to participate in them. We do not propose specific payment amounts for potential SARS-CoV-2 HICS, as these will be highly variable based on the relevant factors described in the report. Instead, we note that it is reasonable to start from payments offered in other similar studies, while adopting a systematic approach based on the ethical framework herein, as reflected in a pragmatic payment worksheet describing goals, coverage, factors to consider, and potential benchmarks.
Tuesday, August 18, 2020
Organizing tests of drugs to treat, and vaccines to prevent, coronavirus
Here's a story on some of the difficulties in drug testing: among the difficulties are that positive test results for infection are taking too long after testing to allow prompt treatment...
Clinical Trials of Coronavirus Drugs Are Taking Longer Than Expected By Katie Thomas
Aug. 14, 2020
"Antibody trials sponsored by Regeneron and Eli Lilly are off to a slow start because of a dearth of tests, overwhelmed hospitals and reluctant patients."
...
"While much of the world’s focus has been on the race to create a coronavirus vaccine, new drugs could also help curb the pandemic by making the disease less deadly. Because drugs are typically tested in sick patients in smaller clinical trials, they can also be developed more quickly than vaccines.
...
"The fast-moving disease has presented opportunities and challenges for the researchers testing antibodies. As the number of infections mounted in states like Florida, Texas and Arizona, there was no shortage of patients who would be eligible for trials. But at the same time, the outbreaks overwhelmed the very hospitals that would be overseeing the studies.
...
"“That doesn’t happen when you’re setting up diabetes trials or cancer trials,” he said. “We’ve had investigators say: ‘Look, I’d love to do research, but I don’t have time to set up a new trial. I’ve got an I.C.U. full of patients.’”
...
"Both the Regeneron and Eli Lilly trials require giving the drug within three days of taking a positive test.
"But with turnaround times in some areas lagging for five days or more, keeping within those time frames has proved difficult."
**********
With conventional (non-challenge) vaccine trials, having a high level of infection is important, to allow the effectiveness of vaccine candidates to be tested. So, Brazil (and the U.S.):
Coronavirus Crisis Has Made Brazil an Ideal Vaccine Laboratory By Manuela Andreoni and Ernesto Londoño Aug. 15, 2020
"Widespread contagion, a deep bench of scientists and a robust vaccine-making infrastructure have made Brazil an important player in the quest to find a vaccine."
...
"Some 5,000 Brazilians have also been recruited to support a vaccine trial conducted by AstraZeneca, a British-Swedish pharmaceutical company in partnership with Oxford University. An additional 1,000 volunteers in Brazil were recruited to test a vaccine developed by New York-based Pfizer.
"Researchers need countries with large enough outbreaks to assess whether a vaccine will work. Some volunteers are given the potential vaccine while others are given a placebo, but they have to be in a place where enough virus is circulating to test the vaccine’s efficacy.
"Brazil, where the virus has infected more than three million people, has clear conditions for these trials. And it will be the only country other than the United States to be playing a major role in three of the leading studies as an unparalleled quest for a vaccine has led to unusually fast regulatory approvals and hastily brokered partnerships."
Monday, August 17, 2020
College admissions in the UK during the pandemic: exams replaced by teacher assessments, algorithms, appeals and disorder
Many exams around the world have been cancelled because of corona virus. For college admissions, which operates on a strict schedule (despite the facts that college is going remote in many places), exam scores have been estimated by teachers and/or algorithms. (That is to say, exams, which are noisy measures of aptitude and accomplishment, are being replaced by noisy predictions of exam performance...)
Wired summarizes the situation in the UK, where exam results are especially salient, since universities issue acceptances conditional on grades:
An Algorithm Determined UK Students' Grades. Chaos Ensued by Amit Katwala
"This year's A-Levels, the high-stakes exams taken in high school, were canceled due to the pandemic. The alternative only exacerbated existing inequities."
...
"The coronavirus pandemic means exams were canceled and replaced with teacher assessments and algorithms. It has created chaos.
"In Scotland, the government was forced to completely change tack after tens of thousands of students were downgraded by an algorithm that changed grades based on a school’s previous performance and other factors. Anticipating similar scenes for today’s A-level results, the government in England has introduced what it’s calling a ‘triple lock’—whereby, via stages of appeals, students will effectively get to choose their grade from a teacher assessment, their mock exam results, or a resit to be taken in the autumn.
*********
So, chaos ensued. The Guardian gives us a taste:
Ofqual 'blindsided' government by revoking A-level appeals process: Move by regulator could leave thousands of students without university places by Richard Adams and Heather Stewart
"The government’s attempts to fix this summer’s broken A-level and GCSE results have been thrown into chaos after the exam regulator Ofqual revoked the appeals process for schools and students that it had published only a few hours earlier.
"The move, which was caused by internal disagreements over the appeals process, could leave thousands of A-level candidates in limbo, including those trying to secure places at universities this autumn by overturning the grades awarded to them by Ofqual’s algorithm.
"The guidance was revoked late on Saturday night, less than eight hours after it was published, leaving school leaders and exam boards bewildered.
"Insiders said Ofqual had “blindsided” the Department for Education, after ministers had endorsed the guidance just two hours earlier.
...
"The controversy is set to deepen on Thursday when GCSE results are published for more than 600,000 year 11 pupils in England. As many as 2m assessments submitted by teachers could be downgraded by Ofqual’s model, which relies on a school’s past performance and each pupil’s previous results from primary school.
"Analysis published by the Observer found that 97% of GCSE results will be allocated solely by Ofqual’s algorithm rather than teacher-assessed grades submitted by schools and colleges. Teacher rankings of pupils will be used to distribute grades within each school."
*********
Also from the Guardian:
A-levels row: Oxford college to honour all offers despite results: Worcester College move comes as thousands of Oxbridge alumni call on others to follow suit. by Aaron Walawalkar
"An Oxford college said it will accept all students with offers regardless of their A-level results, as thousands of Oxbridge alumni call on others to show equal “kindness and generosity” to downgraded pupils.
...
"It comes after Oxbridge applicants who received lower grades than expected on Thursday were told they may have to wait a year before they can start degree courses after successfully appealing against their results.
"About 39% of A-level results were downgraded by the exam regulator Ofqual’s algorithm, with disadvantaged pupils worst affected.
"Ashe told BBC Radio 4: “For us, at a very simple level, it was clear to us before results came out that these students were not going to have sat exams and therefore we took the view that there wasn’t going to be any new information there that could justify rejecting someone to whom we’d made an offer."
Sunday, August 16, 2020
4th Workshop on Mechanism Design for Social Good, August 17-19, 2020 (MD4SG )'20
This week:
4th Workshop on Mechanism Design for Social Good, August 17-19, 2020 (MD4SG '20)
"The fourth workshop on Mechanism Design for Social Good (MD4SG '20) will be held online on August 17-19, 2020. The goal of the workshop is to highlight work where techniques from algorithms, optimization, and mechanism design, along with insights from other disciplines, have the potential to improve access to opportunity for historically underserved and marginalized communities. The workshop will feature keynote presentations, contributed talks, problem pitches and demos, a poster session, and a panel discussion, with a focus on bridging research and policy. To this end, participants will include researchers as well as practitioners in various government and non-government organizations and industry."
Here's the program:
Monday, August 17
Time Event Authors
10:00-10:15 EST Opening Remarks Program Chairs: Faidra Monachou and Francisco Marmolejo-Cossío
10:15-11:00 EST Keynote: Maximizing the Social Good: Markets without Money Nicole Immorlica
11:00-11:45 EST Session 1: Education Policy and Diversity
11:00-11:15 EST Top Percent Policies and the Return to Postsecondary Selectivity Zachary Bleemer
11:15-11:25 EST Unequal Assignment to Public Schools and the Limits of School Choice Mariana Laverde
11:25-11:35 EST Who Gets Placed Where and Why? An Empirical Framework for Foster Care Placement Alejandro Robinson Cortes
11:35-11:45 EST Explainability in Matching Mechanisms with Diversity Goals: A Case Study of Ethiopian Universities Basiliyos Betru, Meareg Hailemariam and Rediet Abebe
11:45-12:00 EST Short Break
12:00-12:45 EST Keynote Anjana Rajan
12:45-13:30 EST Session 2: Technology, Law and Policy
12:45-13:00 EST Feminicide & Machine Learning: Detecting Gender-based Violence to Strengthen Civil Sector Activism Catherine D'Ignazio, Helena Suarez Val, Silvana Fumega, Harini Suresh, Isadora Cruxen, Wonyoung So, Maria De Los Angeles Martinez and Mariel Garcia-Montes
13:00-13:10 EST The Gender Panopticon: AI, Gender, and Design Justice Sonia Katyal
13:10-13:20 EST Privacy as Privilege Rebecca Wexler
13:20-13:30 EST "Computer says no!": Unpacking the Human in the Loop Requirement in the Context of Welfare Fraud Doaa Abu Elyounes
13:30-14:00 EST Long Break
14:00-15:00 EST Session 3: Labor Markets
14:00-14:15 EST The Role of Referrals in Inequality, Immobility, and Inefficiency in Labor Markets Lukas Bolte, Nicole Immorlica and Matthew Jackson
14:15-14:30 EST All Things Equal? Social Networks as a Mechanism for Discrimination Chika Okafor
14:30-14:40 EST Outside Options, Bargaining, and Wages: Evidence from Coworker Networks Sydnee Caldwell and Nikolaj Harmon
14:40-14:50 EST The Geography of Unemployment Adrien Bilal
14:50-15:00 EST Location Sorting and Endogenous Amenities: Evidence from Amsterdam Milena Almagro and Tomas Dominguez-Iino
15:00-16:00 EST Poster Session
16:00-17:00 EST Networking Session
Tuesday, August 18
Time Event Authors
10:00-10:45 EST Keynote: Tech in Support of Caregiving: Innovation Opportunities and Ecosystem Challenges Deborah Estrin
10:45-11:20 EST Session 1: Environment, Agriculture and Food Consumption
10:45-11:00 EST Improving Farmers' Income on Online Agri-platforms: Theory and Field Implementation of a Two-stage Auction Retsef Levi, Manoj Rajan, Somya Singhvi and Yanchong Zheng
11:00-11:10 EST Optimal Interventions for Increasing Healthy Food Consumption Among Low-Income Populations Elisabeth Paulson, Retsef Levi and Georgia Perakis
11:10-11:20 EST Simple and Approximately Optimal Contracts for Payment for Ecosystem Services Wanyi Li, Irene Lo and Itai Ashlagi
11:20-12:00 EST Long Break
12:00-12:45 EST Keynote Natalia Aríza Ramirez
12:45-13:25 EST Session 2: Education in Practice
12:45-13:00 EST School Choice in Chile Natalie Epstein, Jose Correa, Rafael Epstein, Juan Escobar, Ignacio Rios, Nicolas Aramayo, Bastian Bahamondes, Carlos Bonet, Martin Castillo Quintana, Andrés Cristi, Boris Epstein and Felipe Subiabre
13:00-13:15 EST Competition under Social Interactions and the Design of Education Policies Claudia Allende
13:15-13:25 EST From Pipeline to Pipelines: How Multiple Definitions of CS Education Distort CS Enrollment Data Stephanie Tena-Meza, Aj Alvero and Miroslav Suzara
13:25-14:00 EST Long Break
14:00-15:00 EST Panel Discussion (in Spanish, with live captioning) Natalia Aríza Ramirez, José R. Correa, Rafael Obregón
15:00-16:00 EST Session 3: Healthcare
15:00-15:15 EST Large-scale clinical trial of an AI-augmented intervention for HIV prevention in youth experiencing homelessness Bryan Wilder, Laura Onasch-Vera, Graham Diguiseppi, Robin Petering, Chyna Hill, Amulya Yadav, Eric Rice and Milind Tambe
15:15-15:30 EST Heterogeneous Donor Circles for Fair Liver Transplant Allocation Shubham Akshat, Sommer Gentry and S. Raghavan
15:30-15:40 EST Predicting no-show appointments in a pediatric hospital in Chile using machine learning Hector Ramirez, Fabian Villena Rodriguez, Jocelyn Dunstan, Victor Riquelme, Juan Pablo Hoyos, Javier Madariaga and Juan Peypouquet
15:40-15:50 EST Socioeconomic Network Heterogeneity and Pandemic Policy Response Mohammad Akbarpour, Cody Cook, Aude Marzuoli, Simon Mongey, Abhishek Nagaraj, Matteo Saccarola, Pietro Tebaldi, Shoshana Vasserman and Hanbin Yang
15:50-16:00 EST The Consequences of Medicare Pricing: An Explanation of Treatment Choice Elena Falcettoni
16:00-17:00 EST Networking Session
Wednesday, August 19
Time Event Authors
10:00-10:45 EST Keynote Stephanie Dinkins
10:45-11:30 Session 1: Fairness and Inequality
10:45-11:00 EST Measuring Non-Expert Comprehension of Machine Learning Fairness Metrics Debjani Saha, Candice Schumann, Duncan C. McElfresh, John P. Dickerson, Michelle L. Mazurek and Michael Carl Tschantz
11:00-11:10 EST Pipeline Interventions Eshwar Ram Arunachaleswaran, Sampath Kannan, Aaron Roth and Juba Ziani
11:10-11:20 EST Pricing with Fairness Maxime Cohen, Adam Elmachtoub and Xiao Lei
11:20-11:30 EST Public Transit Access and Income Segregation Prottoy Akbar
11:30-12:30 EST Poster Session
12:30-13:15 EST Session 2: Algorithms for Policy and Governance
12:30-12:45 EST Modeling Assumptions Clash with the Real World: Configuring Student Assignment Algorithms to Serve Community Needs Samantha Robertson, Tonya Nguyen and Niloufar Salehi
12:45-12:55 EST The AI Economist: Improving Equality and Productivity with AI-Driven Tax Policies Stephan Zheng, Alex Trott, Sunil Srinivasa, Nikhil Naik, Melvin Gruesbeck, David Parkes and Richard Socher
12:55-13:05 EST (Machine) Learning what Governments Value Daniel Bjorkegren, Joshua Blumenstock and Samsun Knight
13:05-13:15 EST Economic Method, Digital Platform: When Mechanism Design Moves Online Salome Viljoen, Jake Goldenfein and Lee McGuigan
13:15-13:45 EST Long Break
13:45-14:30 EST Session 3: Online Platforms and Civic Participation
13:30-13:45 EST Advertising for Demographically Fair Outcomes Lodewijk Gelauff, Ashish Goel, Kamesh Munagala and Sravya Yandamuri
13:45-13:55 EST Neutralizing Self-Selection Bias in Sampling for Sortition Bailey Flanigan, Paul Gölz, Anupam Gupta and Ariel Procaccia
13:55-14:05 EST Auditing Digital Platforms for Discrimination in Economic Opportunity Advertising Sara Kingsley, Clara Wang, Alexandra Mikhalenko, Proteeti Sinha and Chinmay Kulkarni
14:05-14:15 EST Online Policies for Efficient Volunteer Crowdsourcing Vahideh Manshadi and Scott Rodilitz
14:15-14:30 EST Short Break
14:30-15:10 EST Session 4: Information
14:30-14:40 EST Information Design for Congested Social Services: Optimal Need-Based Persuasion Jerry Anunrojwong, Krishnamurthy Iyer and Vahideh Manshadi
14:40-14:50 EST How to get-toilet-paper.com? Provision of Information as a Public Good Robizon Khubulashvili, Mallory Avery, Kristi Bushman, Alexandros Labrinidis, Sera Linardi and Konstantinos Pelechrinis
14:50-15:00 EST Responsible Sourcing: The First Step Is the Hardest Pia Ramchandrani, Hamsa Bastani and Ken Moon
15:00-15:10 EST Anticipation and Consumption Neil Thakral and Linh To
15:10-15:30 EST Closing Remarks & Award Announcements Faidra Monachou and Francisco Marmolejo-Cossío
15:30-17:00 EST Networking Session
The full program of the workshop will take place on August 17-19, 2020, on Gather.town and Zoom. Please register at this link to attend the talks and other events
Saturday, August 15, 2020
Social distancing during the plague
The Washington Post has the story (as a tourist destination...)
Restaurants in Italy are reopening ancient ‘wine windows’ used during the plague
The coronavirus pandemic has inspired a comeback for the socially distant invention.
By Natalie B. Compton Add to list
"In the 1300s, Europeans lived in fear of the plague claiming lives across the continent. In 2020, Europeans face the threat of the coronavirus, a pandemic that has killed more than 728,000 worldwide.
..."Between the wrath of the Black Death in the 1300s and the Italian Plague in the 1600s, wine merchants in the Italian region of Tuscany built “wine windows” to protect buyers and sellers from coming into close contact."
"The socially distant precaution was ahead of its time."
Friday, August 14, 2020
Should residency program rank order lists be kept confidential from the Dean?
Here's the report of a survey of residency program directors in radiology. One issue, not confined to radiology, is the confidentiality of their rank order list for the resident match--confidentiality from their own administrative hierarchy. The problem with having to show your rank order list to your dean is that it interferes with program directors' incentives to rank candidates in order of true preferences: Thirty-seven percent felt pressure to match applicants from the top of the rank list in order to improve the perceived “success” in the match." That is, some of these programs are refraining from ranking the most desirable applicants they interviewed because they worry these people will match to other programs. This will make their program look bad to the dean (who will ask "how come you have to go so far down on your list?")
“What Program Directors Think” V: Results of the 2019 Spring Survey of the Association of Program Directors in Radiology (APDR) Academic Radiology, 8 August 2020, In Press, Corrected Proof
by Anna Rozenshtein MD, MPH1 Brent D. Griffith MD2 Priscilla J.Slanetz MD, MPH3 Carolynn M.DeBenedectis MD4 Jennifer E.Gould MD Jennifer R.Kohr MD6 Tan-Lucien Mohammed MD, MS7Angelisa M.PaladinMD8Paul J.Rochon MD9 Monica Sheth MD10Ernest F.Wiggins III MD11 Jonathan O.Swanson MD12 Academic Radiology Available online 8 August 2020, In Press, Corrected Proof
...
"Radiology Residency Match: Forty-nine percent of respondents reported that the final rank list is known only to the program administration (PD/APD) and the selection committee, while 27% disclosed the rank list to the department administration and 24% to the institution. Thirty-seven percent felt pressure to match applicants from the top of the rank list in order to improve the perceived “success” in the match."
Thursday, August 13, 2020
Gender distribution of medical residents
Surgeons are still less likely to be women (particularly orthopedic surgeons):
Bennett CL, Baker O, Rangel EL, Marsh RH. The Gender Gap in Surgical Residencies. JAMA Surg. Published online July 29, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2020.2171
HT: Irene Wapnir
Wednesday, August 12, 2020
The end of the beginning of the gig economy? Uber, Lyft and California AB5
The San Francisco Chronicle has the latest news on the most concrete step yet to require Uber and Lyft to shift from a contractor-driver business model to one of driver employees...
Judge says California Uber, Lyft drivers should be employees
by Carolyn Said
"A San Francisco Superior Court judge on Monday granted California’s request for a preliminary injunction to make the state’s Uber and Lyft drivers into employees. The 34-page order was scathing about the ride-hailing companies’ “prolonged and brazen refusal to comply with California law,” namely AB5, the new gig-work law that makes it harder for companies to claim that workers are independent contractors.
...
"However, it is likely to have little immediate impact.
"Judge Ethan Schulman stayed his injunction for 10 days. The companies will appeal it and seek a longer stay before the 10 days are up. An appeals court likely would hear their emergency motion quickly. Uber said it expects to be granted the longer-term delay and does not anticipate any near-term changes to its business. No matter what, it could not hire tens of thousands of drivers in a matter of days, it said.
...
"AB5 established an ABC test that says workers are employees unless A) they are free from a hiring entity’s control, B) perform work outside the hiring entity’s usual business, and C) have an independent business doing that kind of work.
...
"Along with other gig companies, Uber and Lyft are pursuing a $110 million November ballot measure, Proposition 22, asking California voters to keep drivers as freelancers who are entitled to some earnings guarantees and benefits. DoorDash, Instacart and Postmates, the other Prop. 22 backers, are not named in the California lawsuit but presumably would be affected by whatever precedent it sets. (Uber has purchased Postmates in a deal that will close next year.)"
Tuesday, August 11, 2020
Transplanting two kidneys from older deceased donors to reduce discards
Monday, August 10, 2020
Reputation among thieves: ransomware and kidnapping
Monday, June 24, 2019 Kidnapping insurance
Tuesday, September 13, 2016 Ransom as a (not so) repugnant transaction
Saturday, June 27, 2015 Ransom as a repugnant transaction--the U.S. relaxes its position
Monday, August 9, 2010 Brokers for pirate ransom
Saturday, December 5, 2009 Market for kidnapping
Friday, February 13, 2009 Pirate ransom: counterparty risk in the endgame
Sunday, November 30, 2008 Pirate ransom: counterparty risk
Sunday, August 9, 2020
Experimental Economics SITE conference at Stanford, by Zoom, Aug 10 and 11, 2020
Tomorrow and Tuesday, here's the SITE Experimental Economics conference schedule (Mon Aug. 10 and Tuesday Aug. 11).
Muriel Introduce SITE confernece | |||
SESSION 1: 9am - 10:30am pacific (12pm eastern, 6pm europe) | Lise - in charge | ||
1 | Overriding in Teams: The Role of Beliefs, Social Image, and Gender | Maria Recalde, University of Melbourne | (Lise Q) |
2 | Information and the Persistence of the Gender Wage Gap: Early Evidence from California's Salary History Ban | Benjamin Hansen, University of Oregon | (Lise Q) |
3 | Attention as Human Capital | Heather Schofield, University of Pennsylvania | (Colin Q) |
10:30am - 11am pacific: Break/Discussion (1pm eastern, 7pm europe) | |||
SESSION 2: 11 -12:30pm pacific (2pm eastern, 8pm europe) | Muriel - in charge | ||
4 | Social Learning in Groups: an Experimental Study | Marina Agranov, Caltech | (Muriel Q) |
5 | Beliefs in Repeated Games | Guillaume Frechette, NYU | (Muriel Q) |
6 | Beyond Ordinal: The Value of Indifferences and Cardinal Information in Matching | Clayton Featherstone, University of Pennsylvania | (Muriel Q) |
12:30pm - 1pm pacific: Break/Discussion (3:30pm eastern, 9:30pm europe) | |||
Day 2 (August 11) | |||
SESSION 3: 9:30am -10:30pm pacific (12:30pm eastern, 6:30pm europe) | Lise - in charge | ||
7 | The Burden of Holding Debt | Alejandro Martínez-Marquina, Stanford University | |
8 | Claiming Credit: Gender, Memory, and Social Norms | Jonas Mueller-Gastell, Stanford University | |
9 | It’s Not my Fault: Excuse-Seeking Behavior in the Intertemporal Domain | Marissa Lepper, University of Pittsburgh | |
10 | Do Actions Speak Louder than Motives? Evaluating the Effectiveness of Image-Fundraising | Pun (pronounced like "Poon") Winichakul, University of Pittsburgh | |
10:30am - 11am pacific: Break/Discussion (1pm eastern, 7pm europe) | |||
SESSION 4: 11 -12:30pm pacific (2pm eastern, 8pm europe) | Muriel - in charge | ||
11 | Fairness Across the World: Preferences and Beliefs | Alexander W. Cappelen, Norwegian School of Economics | (Christine Q) |
12 | Cognitive Flexibility or Moral Commitment? Evidence of Anticipated Belief Distortion | Silvia Saccardo, Carnegie Mellon University | (Christine Q) |
13 | Digital Addiction | Hunt Allcott, New York University and Microsoft Research | (Colin Q) |
Muriel close SITE confernece | |||
12:30pm - 1pm pacific: Break/Discussion (3:30pm eastern, 9:30pm europe) | |||