In healthcare, digital solutions have been adopted with zeal, but there is paucity of evidence for benefits and harms of these solutions. The impact, immediate or long term, of digital applications on healthcare has not been assessed. With the overwhelming numbers and types of digital solutions, it is becoming increasingly important to develop evidence-based insights for the integration of these solutions in routine medical care. Digitalization can certainly empower and enable patients and physicians to achieve health objectives. The World Health Organisation has released guidance for digital health after a critical review of available evidence for the benefits, harms, acceptability, feasibility, resource use and equity considerations of digital health interventions. This guidance can potentially inspire and impact future research endeavors for digital applications. In this paper, the guidance has been reviewed in context of the current research situation and insights are shared for researchers engaged in the design and assessment of digital interventions.

Beginning with the Cigarettes Act, 1975, a number of legislative strategies and programs to curb tobacco use have been implemented in India, with limited success. Currently, the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003, is designed to curb the use of tobacco in order to protect and promote public health. This review presents a critical appraisal of the current situation in its historical context.

No abstract

IntroductionWe reviewed the health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines for therapies targeting orphan conditions in four countries/regions in Asia.MethodsA pragmatic literature search was conducted to identify and review key documents outlining reimbursement, pricing, and coverage policies in China, Taiwan, Korea, and Japan.ResultsTherapies for rare diseases in Japan and those for ultra-rare diseases in Korea are exempt from cost-effectiveness evaluations. Taiwan provides full financial coverage for rare disease therapies. China has no special considerations for rare diseases. Drugs included in the medical insurance list are reimbursed at varying levels depending on the “class” of the listing. Unlike prior variations at provincial levels for coverage of off-the-list drugs, new national policy has introduced consistency in coverage.ConclusionsAccess and reimbursement processes vary between markets in Asia. New HTA guidelines in Japan allow for easier access to therapies targeting rare diseases by eliminating cost-effectiveness analysis for price determination. On the other hand, a value dossier including an economic evaluation is necessary for rare diseases in Korea. However, manufacturers can provide risk-sharing schemes for rare diseases. China has not yet introduced any specific evaluations or reimbursement criteria for therapies targeting rare diseases. Policies for rare diseases are evolving rapidly to improve access and affordability.

Cancer care is increasingly becoming challenging in low resource settings. With the improved availability and access of generic medicines and biosimilars, cost-effective and affordable treatment can be offered to cancer patients. However, generics and biosimilars continue to be plagued with negative perceptions that impact the adoption of these products. Lack of understanding and negative perceptions regarding the quality, safety, effectiveness, integrity and stability, formulations, manufacturing, and costs of generics and biosimilars are more common in the developing countries. Their equivalence to innovator counterparts is often doubted. Collaborative efforts for enhanced utilization of generics and biosimilars in oncology should be made by physicians, healthcare professionals, manufacturers and sponsors of these drugs, and national healthcare systems. Steps to improve access and utilization of these drugs include procurement of high-quality generics and biosimilars, formulary management, supply chain integrity, continued safety surveillance, and educational programs to improve knowledge mitigate fears in healthcare professionals and patients. Objective and standard frameworks should be developed and used to identify the perceptions and factors impacting the adoption of generics and biosimilars. Outcomes in hematological malignancies can be improved with the adoption of generics and biosimilars, in particular in low-income countries where access and affordability of chemotherapy is challenging.