Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36673993›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

RETRACTED: Does Innovative City Pilot Policy Stimulate the Chinese Regional Innovation: An Application of DID Model.

Muniba, Baorong Yu

RetractedAbstract readRetracted Publication
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

MunibaSchool of Insurance and Economics, University of International Business and Economics, Beijing 100029, China.
Baorong YuSchool of Insurance and Economics, University of International Business and Economics, Beijing 100029, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Urban innovation has always been a research topic of scholars, but research focusing on the relationship between innovative city pilot policy and regional innovation is still relatively rare. The objective of this study is to examine the impact of the pilot policy on urban innovation convergence based on panel data in China from 2003 to 2016. The difference-in-differences (DID) method was used. First, we find that the pilot policy not only improves the innovation level of cities (basic effect) but also promotes innovation convergence among pilot cities (convergence effect). The convergence of scientific and technological personnel and financial technology investment are potential impact mechanisms. Second, compared with the basic effect, the convergence effect of the pilot policy has a time lag of three to five years. Regarding spatial spillover, the policy convergence effect is slightly smaller than the basic effect radius (although not robust). Finally, while the spillover effect caused by policy increases the innovation growth rate of surrounding cities more significantly, the basic and convergence effects are not significant in the western region. The results reveal the positive impact of the pilot policy on narrowing urban innovation gaps and highlight the risk of further marginalization of some cities. These findings contribute to accurately evaluating the regional innovation differences and provide an important policy implication for development strategy.

Indexed as

CitiesChinaEconomic DevelopmentPolicyChinadifference in difference (DID)innovation convergenceinnovation dispersioninnovative city pilot policyregional innovation difference

Identifiers

PMID36673993
PMCPMC9859584

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.