The effective collection and management of personal data of rapidly migrating populations is important for ensuring adequate healthcare and monitoring of a displaced peoples’ health status. With developments in ICT data sharing capabilities, electronic personal health records (ePHRs) are increasingly replacing less transportable paper records. ePHRs offer further advantages of improving accuracy and completeness of information and seem tailored for rapidly displaced and mobile populations. Various emerging initiatives in Europe are seeking to develop migrant‐centric ePHR responses. This paper highlights their importance and benefits, but also identifies a number of significant ethical, legal and social issues (ELSI) and challenges to their design and implementation, regarding (1) the kind of information that should be stored, (2) who should have access to information, and (3) potential misuse of information. These challenges need to be urgently addressed to make possible the beneficial use of ePHRs for vulnerable migrants in Europe.
PurposeThis review explores the phenomenon of front-of-pack nutrition labels (FoPNLs) in the European Union (EU). FoPNLs highlight the nutritional quality of food and non-alcoholic beverages and help consumers to make healthier choices. The review explores different types of FoPNLs and evaluates their effectiveness.Design/methodology/approachA policy analysis was conducted, relying on extant academic literature, grey literature and policy documents. The use of current FoPNLs is interpreted in light of national and economic interests.FindingsOur review identifies and describes seven government endorsed FoPNLs that are currently used in the EU. Five are positive endorsement labels (Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Lithuania, Slovenia and Sweden), which only provide a positive indication on more healthy products. The Keyhole is used in three EU countries (Denmark, Lithuania and Sweden), while the others are used in one country each. The Nutri-Score represents a summary label, which provides an overall grade of how healthy a product is. It is used in six countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Netherlands, Spain and Luxembourg). Finally, the Nutrinform battery is a nutrient-specific non-interpretive scheme, indicating the content of nutrients in a portion of a food product. All identified labels are only used on a voluntary basis, encouraging selective use.Originality/valueThis review contributes to a significant discussion about food labeling in the EU. It summarizes existing approaches and evaluates them in terms of their effectiveness. The current schemes in use reflect regional clustering. The most common scheme is the Nutri-Score. This is predominantly found in western EU states. Another major label is the Keyhole, with summary endorsement schemes being prevalent in northern EU states. The least common is Nutrinform, which has some support in southern EU states. The Nutri-score is most effective although economic interests are pushing for the Nutrinform battery in a small number of states. Finally, the review suggests that all existing FoPNLs are voluntary, these labels fail to provide consumers with adequate information about nutrition quality of food products. The EU needs to mobilize support to agree on a single one.
Since 1998, the European Court of Justice (EUCJ) has established a set of principles concerning patient mobility across Member States. At present, these principles are challenged against a new background, i.e., an enlarged EU and austerity-driven measures in the field of healthcare. This is even more relevant in view of the significant differences between countries and between services on healthcare access. In the Petru case, a Romanian woman sought healthcare in Germany due to an alleged lack of basic infrastructure in her local Romanian hospital. A crucial question arises in this context of whether the patient's interests (i.e., right to cross-border healthcare) or the Member State's interests (i.e., financial stability of the healthcare system) prevail. We analyse this case and its implications for future patient mobility. From the point of view of patients, the EUCJ's decision implies that also a lack of medication and basic medical supplies can be claimed as "undue delay", however for Member States it is sufficient to provide quality treatments in at least one hospital. Although the Court has provided a solution for the Petru case, we argue that major challenges remain, such as the definition of the international state-of-the-art or other limitations to reductions of the health basket.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.