We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Sampled in this chapter are some signs seen in shopping establishements. They include types of businesses, parts of a store, routine steps for making a purchase, (non-cash) payment methods, discount, and receipts.
This chapter covers the Bank’s introduction of its receipt (quasi-repo) facility in 1683 and its simultaneous transition to a fiat-money standard. Data extracted from the Bank’s ledgers (which survive from 1666) show that before the introduction of receipts, the Bank routinely executed large purchases of silver in order to maintain the size of its balance sheet and to ensure an adequate stock of metallic assets. These data also show that the Bank’s open market purchases were curtailed after the introduction of the receipt system, which created greater incentives for Bank customers to deposit trade coins into the Bank. With the introduction of receipts, Bank ledger balances unaccompanied by a receipt lost their rights to redemption in coin—Bank money became fiat money. The archival data suggest that the transition to fiat money was chiefly motivated by a desire to improve Bank accounting, via a reduction in the set of feasible transactions involving precious metal. The chapter shows how the transition to fiat money also stabilized the market value of Bank money. An appendix to this chapter presents a methodology for classifying Bank transactions from entries in its ledgers.
This chapter further analyzes the workings of the receipt system, using data from the Bank’s cash books, which survive from 1711. These data show that heavy usage of the receipt system began from about 1714, following the end of the War of Spanish Succession. From about 1720, most coins entering the Bank under receipt were foreign coins. Inflows of coins into the Bank’s receipt facility are shown to be appreciable percentages of New World gold and silver production. Coins under receipt were usually withdrawn from the Bank less than a year after they were deposited, with the exception of gold coins, which were sometimes surrendered to the Bank upon expiration of their receipts (such coins were said to be “fallen to the Bank”). Waves of fallen gold coins sometimes coincided with surges of gold into Amsterdam, as occurred after the 1720 collapse of John Law’s system in France. Because the receipt system functioned much as a repo facility, the chapter concludes with a derivation of implicit discounts (“haircuts”) on coins under receipt. Haircuts on silver coins are shown to be consistently positive, while haircuts on gold coins are variable and sometimes negative. These haircuts, combined with higher redemption fees for gold, created incentives for more consistent use of the receipt facility for silver coins, while usage of the receipt facility for gold was intermittent.
Despite its effectiveness, surgery for drug-resistant epilepsy is underutilized. However, whether epilepsy surgery is also underutilized among patients with stroke-related drug-resistant epilepsy is unclear. Therefore, our objectives were to estimate the rates of epilepsy surgery assessment and receipt among patients with stroke-related drug-resistant epilepsy and to identify factors associated with these outcomes.
Methods:
We used linked health administrative databases to conduct a population-based retrospective cohort study of adult Ontario, Canada residents discharged from an Ontario acute care institution following the treatment of a stroke between January 1, 1997, and December 31, 2020, without prior evidence of seizures. We excluded patients who did not subsequently develop drug-resistant epilepsy and those with other epilepsy risk factors. We estimated the rates of epilepsy surgery assessment and receipt by March 31, 2021. We planned to use Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard models to identify covariates independently associated with our outcomes, controlling for the competing risk of death.
Results:
We identified 265,081 patients who survived until discharge following inpatient stroke treatment, 1,902 (0.7%) of whom subsequently developed drug-resistant epilepsy (805 women; mean age: 67.0 ± 13.1 years). Fewer than six (≤0.3%) of these patients were assessed for or received epilepsy surgery before the end of follow-up (≤55.5 per 100,000 person-years). Given that few outcomes were identified, we could not proceed with the multivariable analyses.
Conclusions:
Patients with stroke-related drug-resistant epilepsy are infrequently considered for epilepsy surgery that could reduce morbidity and mortality.