Bakgrund: Efter införandet av IFRS har det förekommit en del förändringar gentemot tidigare redovisnings regler i Sverige. Från och med 1 januari år 2005 skall alla börsbolag gå över till IFRS 3 Business Combinations. Detta innebär att goodwill inte får skrivas av så som det gjorts tidigare. Nu mer måste det årligen ske ett Impairment test av goodwill för att undersöka om det föreligger ett nedskrivningsbehov.Diskonteringsräntan används vid impairment test av goodwill och är en viktig faktor vid nuvärdesberäkningar av kassaflöden. Problem: Noterade börsbolag utför ett impairment test av goodwill, vilket görs för att undersöka om nedskrivning av goodwill är aktuellt eller inte. Diskonteringsräntan är en viktig faktor vid Impairment test. Trots detta test utför inte de flesta företag nedskrivningar. Varför gör inte företag några nedskrivningar kan det bero på att en praxis utvecklats? Hur bestämmer företag diskonteringsräntan och varför, vilka är dess komponenter?  Syfte: Med denna undersökning är att beskriva systematiskt hur företag tar fram sina valda diskonteringsräntor för omprövning av goodwill, kan detta bero på en praxisutveckling eller av andra omständigheter. Vi vill även undersöka vilka metoder företag använder sig för att ta fram dess diskonteringsränta samt dess komponenter. Metod: Undersökningen i denna uppsats har främst utgått från en kvantitativ enkätundersökning, även vetenskapliga tidskrifter samt skriftliga källor har använts.Totalt kontaktades 108 stycken noterade företag på Stockholms börs. Slutsatser: Det har visat sig att företag använder sig av förväntade kassaflöden vid framtagning av dess diskonteringsränta och WACC modellen. Impairment test har visat sig vara av betydelse då det ger en mer rättvisande bild och överblick på goodwill. / Background: Following the introduction of IFRS, has given rise to some changes towards the previous accounting rules in Sweden. As of January 1 year 2005, all listed companies move to IFRS 3 Business Combinations. This means that goodwill is not to be amortized as done previously. Now annually there has to be an Impairment test of goodwill in order to investigate whether there is need for impairment or not. The discount rate is used for impairment testing of goodwill and is an important factor in calculating the discounted value of cash flows. Problem: Public listed company doing an impairment test of goodwill is done to examine whether the impairment of goodwill is relevant or not. The discount is an important factor in Impairment test. Although it's showed that most companies do not need to write down goodwill. Why do not some companies write-down goodwill, is it maybe that a practice developed? How do companies discount and why? What are its components? Purpose: This study is to describe systematically how firms develop their selected discount rates for review of goodwill, is it maybe due to a practice development or other circumstances. We also want to explore the methods companies use to develop its discount rate and its components. Method: The study in this thesis has mainly been based on a quantitative survey, including scientific journals and written sources. 108 companies listed on the Stockholm stock exchange were contacted. Conclusions: It has been shown that companies use the expected cash flows at the development of its discount rate and WACC model. Impairment tests have also proved to be of importance since it gives a more accurate picture and overview of goodwill.

No description available.

No description available.

A Thesis submitted to The University of Arizona College of Medicine - Phoenix in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Medicine. / Objective: This study was performed to provide a detailed analysis of the MoCA versus the MMSE, including an item analysis and an examination of threshold scores appropriate for use in different clinical settings. Methods: 135 subjects enrolled in a longitudinal clinicopathologic study were administered the MoCA and MMSE. Subjects were classified as cognitively impaired or cognitively normal based on neuropsychological testing and consensus conference diagnosis. Results: 89 subjects were cognitively normal, 46 cognitively impaired (20 dementia, 26 MCI). ROC analysis showed that, for any threshold value selected for the MMSE to identify cognitive impairment, a MoCA value with better sensitivity and specificity could be identified. Recall performed best among individual items on the MMSE, and Orientation performed best on the MoCA. Overall, the best discrimination was obtained using a weighted combination of four items (2*MoCA-Orientation + MMSE-Recall + MoCA-Language + 0.5* MoCA-Visuospatial/Executive; AUC 0.94). A MoCA threshold score of 26 had a sensitivity of 98% and specificity of 52% for identifying cognitive 5 impairment. A MoCA threshold score of 21 had a sensitivity of 57% and specificity of 96%. Conclusions: The MoCA was superior to the MMSE in detecting cognitive impairment. Individual domains on the MoCA and MMSE made substantially different contributions to each instrument’s sensitivity, and a weighted subset of items from both instruments performed best in detecting cognitive impairment. A lower MoCA threshold score may be appropriate in a population with a higher prevalence of cognitive impairment such as a memory clinic.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Background There appears to be clear evidence of cognitive impairment in schizophrenia which is wide ranging and relatively stable throughout the illness. Both cognitive impairment and treatment response have been argued to be highly relevant in risk assessment and management of offenders. However, there does not appear to be any research in this area on mentally disordered offenders. It is on this basis that this study attempts to determine the impact of cognitive impairment on treatment responsivity in mentally disordered offenders. Method A cohort quantitative research design was used and the data were obtained via the administration of neuropsychological assessments and self-report measures. Neuropsychological data on attention, executive functioning, memory and IQ were matched with treatment gain scores for 114 male mentally disordered offenders. The participants were further matched according to the group treatments they had participated in resulting in five different groups. Results Univariate and bivariate analyses were used to explore the relationship between cognitive predictor variables and treatment gain scores. Variables that were significantly associated with treatment gain scores were further investigated using multiple regression analyses. Results indicated that for each group, cognitive variables such as attention and memory were significantly predictive of treatment gain scores. Conclusion The results indicate the need to consider cognitive impairment constructs such as attention, executive functioning, memory and IQ when determining appropriate interventions for mentally disorders offenders. Doing so may improve treatment responsivity and have a consequent impact on risk management and recidivism. The research limitations are discussed in relation to the methodology used, and clinical implications and directions for future research are explored.

The problem with which this investigation is concerned is that of determining the effect of neurological impairment on the Rorschach performance of children.