Empirical evidence from the academic literature on capital market effects of financial information placement (i.e., recognition on the face of the primary financial statements versus disclosure in the notes to the financial statements) is not straightforward. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to contribute to the recognition versus required disclosure debate in a standard-setting context by exploring possible reasons for perceived differences between recognized and disclosed amounts. These differences, in our view, arise due to demonstrated auditors’ greater tolerance for misstatement in disclosed amounts, allowed noncompliance with disclosure requirements even in strong enforcement regimes, lesser care that preparers of financial statements devote to disclosures relative to recognized items as well as behavioural factors and differential processing costs related to the users of financial information. We believe that these arguments strengthen the case for the general preference for the recognition of financial information in the standard-setting context. The original scientific contribution of this paper is to systematically identify the reasons for the differences between recognized and disclosed amounts in financial statements. As such, this paper may provide a suitable basis for the justification of certain conceptual changes in the field of international accounting standards that are currently underway.
The purpose of this study was to translate the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score into Slovenian and to test its validity on Slovenian patients who underwent low anterior rectal resection.
The LARS score was translated from English into Slovenian and then back-translated following international recommendations. The Slovenian version of the LARS questionnaire was completed by patients who underwent low anterior rectal resection between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2010 at the University Medical Centre Ljubljana. An anchor question assessing the impact of bowel function on lifestyle was included. To assess test-retest reliability, some of the patients answered the LARS score questionnaire twice.
A total of 100 patients (66.7%) of the 150 patients who were contacted for participation, were included in the final analysis. A total of 58 patients reported major LARS score. The LARS score was able to discriminate between patients who received radiotherapy and those who did not (p<0.001), and between total and partial mesorectal excision (p<0.001). Age was not associated with a greater LARS score (p=0.975). There was a perfect fit between the QoL category question and the LARS score in 66.0% of cases and a moderate fit was found in 24.0% of the cases, showing good convergent validity. Test-retest reliability of 51 patients showed a high intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.86.
The Slovenian translation of the LARS score is a valid tool for measuring LARS.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of the surgical treatment on Slovenian colorectal cancer patients’ health-related quality of life and to compare the results to the health-related quality of life of the general Slovenian population.
Patients and methods
A total of 413 patients with colorectal cancer operated on at the Abdominal Surgery Department at the Ljubljana University Medical Center between January 1st, 2016 and December 31st, 2017 were sent two standardized and validated questionnaires: the EORTC QLQ-C30 version 3 and EORTC QLQ-CR29. The questionnaires were returned by 197 patients.
Compared to the general population, poorer physical (p < 0.001), role (p = 0.002), cognitive (p = 0.021), and social functioning (p < 0.001) with higher frequency of constipation (p < 0.001), diarrhea (p < 0.001), and financial difficulties (p < 0.001) were reported by the colorectal patients. Female patients reported lower cognitive (p = 0.034) and emotional (p = 0.008) functioning, as well as higher frequency of bloating (p = 0.049) and hair loss (p = 0.01). Compared to the younger group of patients, lower physical functioning (p < 0.001) and higher urinary frequency (p = 0.007), urinary incontinence (p = 0.007), buttock pain (p = 0.007), and anxiety regarding body weight (p = 0.031) were detected among the older group of colorectal patients.
The global health status of colorectal patients in Slovenia is comparable to that of the general Slovenian population, but there is a significantly lower level in some of the quality-of-life scales.