ArticlePloS one2022
COVID-19: Tail risk and predictive regressions.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Power law in COVID-19 cases in China.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, (Statistics in Society) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The paper focuses on econometrically justified robust analysis of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on financial markets in different countries across the World. It provides the results of robust estimation and inference on predictive regressions for returns on major stock indexes in 23 countries in North and South America, Europe, and Asia incorporating the time series of reported infections and deaths from COVID-19. We also present a detailed study of persistence, heavy-tailedness and tail risk properties of the time series of the COVID-19 infections and death rates that motivate the necessity in applications of robust inference methods in the analysis. Econometrically justified analysis is based on heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent (HAC) inference methods, recently developed robust t-statistic inference approaches and robust tail index estimation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.