MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804615739

Impact of Financial Disruption on Firms’ Performance (An Event Study)

2018· article· en· W2804615739 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohammad Yameen, Najib H.S. Farhan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicWorking Capital and Financial Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)InterimBusinessStock exchangeFinanceSample (material)Event studyDescriptive statisticsNet profitProfit (economics)EconomicsStatisticsMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to estimate the effect of financial disruption on the performance of pharmaceutical companies listed on Bombay Stock Exchange. The total number of listed pharmaceutical companies on Bombay Stock Exchange is 153 companies, 32 companies were excluded due to non-availability of the quarterly financial reports. Three variables have been taken for exploring the impact of financial disruption on the firms’ performance which are: net sales, net profit and earning per share.  Data were extracted from interim quarterly financial reports retrieved from the Prowess Q database. Two steps of analysis have been conducted using EViews. First, comparing firm’s performance pre disruption period second quarter (September, 2016) with firm’s performance post disruption period third quarter (December, 2016). Second, comparing the firms’ performance post disruption, third quarter (December, 2016) with the same quarter (December, 2015). Descriptive statistics and paired sample T-test were applied to evaluate the effect of the financial disruption on firms’ performance. The findings reveal that the financial disruption has no statistically significant impact on the performance of the pharmaceutical companies at level of 5%.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWorking Capital and Financial PerformanceFrench-language works237,207