Differential effects of public and private funding in the medical device industry

References

• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Healthy people 2010: understanding and improving health. Washington (DC): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• AHC Media. The medical device daily state of the industry report 2007. Atlanta (GA): AHC Media; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. Venture funding and the NIH SBIR program. Washington (DC): National Research Council; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Dorsey ER, De Roulet J, Thompson JP, et al. Funding of US biomedical research 2003-2008. JAMA. 2010;303:137–143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephan P. Wrapping it up in a person: the mobility patterns of new PhDs. Innov Policy Econ. 2006;7:71–98.
   Google Scholar
• Mowery D. America’s industrial resurgence: how strong, how durable? Issues Sci Technol. 1999;15(3):41–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harvard business school [Internet]. Boston (MA): Institute for Strategy & Competitiveness. 2017. Available from: http://www.isc.hbs.edu/Pages/default.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Arrow AK, Ommanney SF. Medical technology in perspective. New York (NY): Lazard Freres; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Mofidi A, Stone J. Do state and local taxes affect economic growth? Rev Econ Stat. 1990;72:686–691.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans P, Karras G. Are government activities productive? Evidence from a panel of US states. Rev Econ Stat. 1994;76:1–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higgins MJ, Levy D, Young AT. Growth and convergence across the U.S.: evidence from county-level data. Rev Econ Stat. 2006;88:671–681.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothaermel FT, Ku DN. Intercluster innovation differentials: the role of research universities. IEEE Trans Eng Manag. 2008;55:9–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cobb CW, Douglas PH. A theory of production. Am Econ Rev. 1928;18:139–165.
   Google Scholar
• Valeri L, Vanderweele TJ. Mediation analysis allowing for exposure-mediator interactions and causal interpretation: theoretical assumptions and implementation with SAS and SPSS macros. Psychol Methods. 2013;18(2):137–150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robins JM, Greenland S. Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology. 1992;3:143–155.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearl J Direct and indirect effects. Proceedings of the Seventeenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence; San Francisco (CA): Morgan Kaufmann; 2001. p. 411–420.
   Google Scholar
• VanderWeele TJ, Vansteelandt S. Conceptual issues concerning mediation, interventions and composition. Stat Interface. 2009;2(4):457–468.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VanderWeele TJ, Vansteelandt S. Odds ratios for mediation analysis for a dichotomous outcome. Am J Epidemiol. 2010;172(12):1339–1348.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Imai K, Keele L, Tingley D. A general approach to causal mediation analysis. Psychol Methods. 2010a;15(4):309–334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Imai K, Keele L, Tingley D, et al. Causal mediation analysis using R. Advances in social science research using R. Vinod HD, editor. New York (NY): Springer; 2010b 129–154.
   Google Scholar
• Preacher KJ, Rucker DD, Hayes AF. Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behav Res. 2007;42(1):185–227.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang L, Wang H, Cox C. Assessing interaction effects in linear measurement error models. J Royal Stat Society Ser C (Applied Statistics). 2005;54(1):21–30.
   Google Scholar
• MacKinnon DP. Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. New York (NY): Erlbaum; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;51:1173–1182.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomson reuters [Internet]. New York (NY): Securities Data Company (SDC) Platinum. 2017. Available from: https://financial.thomsonreuters.com/en/products/data-analytics/market-data/sdc-platinum-financial-securities.html
   Google Scholar
• Cohen WM, Nelson RR, Walsh JR. Protecting their intellectual assets: appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firms patent (or not). NBER Working Paper. 2000;#7552.
   Google Scholar
• Zucker LG, Darby MR, Brewer MB. Intellectual human capital and the birth of U.S. biotechnology enterprises. Am Econ Rev. 1998;88:290–306.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thursby JG, Thursby M. Who is selling the ivory tower? Source of growth in university licensing. Manage Sci. 2002;48:90–104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothaermel FT, Thursby M. University-incubator firm knowledge flows: assessing their impact on incubator firm performance. Res Policy. 2005;34:305–320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Audretsch DB, Lehmann EE, Warning S. University spillovers and new firm location. Res Policy. 2005;34:1113–1122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mueller P. Exploring the knowledge filter: how entrepreneurship and university-industry relationships drive economic growth. Res Policy. 2006;35:1499–1508.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacGarvie M, Furman JL. Early academic science and the birth of industrial research laboratories in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. NBER working paper No. 11470. Cambridge (MA): National Bureau of Economic Research; 2005. Available from: http://www.nber.org/papers/w11470.
   Google Scholar
• National science foundation [Internet]. Alexandria (VA): National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. 2017. Available from: https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/srvydoctorates/
   Google Scholar
• Audretsch DB, Keilbach M. Entrepreneurship capital and economic performance. Reg Stud. 2004;38:949–959.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samila S, Sorenson O. Venture capital as a catalyst to commercialization. Res Policy. 2010;39:1348–1360.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park DP, Steensma HK. When does corporate venture capital add value for new ventures? Strategic Manag J. 2012;33(1):1–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schilling MA. Understanding the alliance data. Strategic Manag J. 2009;30(3):233–260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fritsch M. How does new business formation affect regional development? Introduction to the special issue. Small Business Economics. 2008;30:1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar