Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Public Econ. 2016 Nov 23;145:181–200. doi: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2016.11.010

Table 5.

Technological Novelty in Cardiovascular Devices

(1) Ln Approval Time (Months) (2) Approval Time (3) Approval Time (Months)
Panel A: Cardiovascular Subsample Only (by Prod. Code)

First in Product Code 0.2334* (0.1292) 5.1143** (2.4862) 6.8224** (2.6205)
N 183 183 163
R2 0.5009 0.4372 0.4118

Panel B: Devices in 8 Functional Categories

First in Category 0.1624 (0.2767) 2.7185 (5.3434) 9.0857 (5.8699)
N 183 183 179
R2 0.4899 0.4206 0.4218

Panel C: Controlling for Technological Uncertainty

First in Product Code 0.2327* (0.1376) 5.2872** (2.6466) 7.1890** (2.8121)
First in Category 0.0041 (0.2934) −1.1056 (5.6446) −2.1300 (5.7774)
N 183 183 163
R2 0.5009 0.4374 0.4125
*

p<0.05,

**

p<0.01,

***

p<0.001

This table looks at first entrants and their respective approval delays in a) product codes b) functional categories and c) both in the same model.

All models include firm and year fixed effects. Models also include controls for whether a product was granted “priority” (expedited) review and a count of the applicant firm’s approved applications at the time of submission.

Column 1 presents a log-linear model, while Column 2 translates the result into months. Column 3 restricts the sample to only the first entrant plus those subsequent entrants who submitted applications after the first entrant’s approval decision was finalized.