Background: Users of YouTube videos face considerable difficulty in handling the rapidly growing uploaded material. Videos can fall into various genres, and a single video can possess a number of characteristics. Rationale- Customized selection of the most appropriate videos for learning, teaching or research is hard to achieve. Appropriate tagging of videos for different characteristics by the uploaders for helping audience in their selection warrant meticulously designed structured format for categorizing the videos based on multiple characteristics. But no complete structured format is available for such categorization. Material & Methods: A cross-sectional analysis of 120 YouTube medical educational videos on Embryology selected through a multiphase systematic method using search terms chosen from selected focus areas of Embryology was done. This was aimed at identifying video characteristics of four functional natures: basic, academic, technical and esthetic. Using the ‘identified’ and related ‘identifiable’ characteristics, a “Proposed categorization format” was developed. Feedback on this document was obtained from five stakeholder groups i.e., anatomists, medical educationists, medical video creators, film/video/graphics experts and postgraduate students of Anatomy through a multiple-group discussion session. Results: Consensuses built on their opinions and lone voices were incorporated to develop the “Final version” of the format that possesses 38 Broad Characteristics, 179 Options, 59 Suboptions and fourteen Sub-suboptions. Conclusion: This format should be helpful in establishing a comprehensive database of medical educational videos on Embryology and with slight customization, on other anatomical subdivisions and other disciplines. But before that validation of the format by putting them into use should be justified.
A89 net searches of relevant websites (such as different health technology assessment agencies in Europe). Researchers conducted discussions with payers and biopharma experts to identify the perceived differences in pricing negotiations between countries. RESULTS: There are distinctive differences in the approaches to pricing negotiations between payers in the US and Europe. These lead to determinable patterns in the methods that biopharma companies leverage to price their products and in the methods that payers use, by either working with the biopharma companies or creating reimbursement mechanisms to guide the appropriate utilization of these products. European payers have more central negotiating leverage and more formalized health technology assessments, which enable them to negotiate and even mandate prices and/or develop outcome-based contracts. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike European payers, most US payers do not have the support of similar governmentbacked organizations for negotiating price, and most cannot optimally leverage health technology assessments. This forces US payers to seek more creative ways of managing the utilization of products through medical policies, prior authorizations and creative reimbursement methods.OBJECTIVES: Prices of medicines differ across EU Member States due to factors, some of which are beyond responsibilities of companies. These differences include: wholesaler or pharmacy margins, sales tax, pack sizes, distribution channels, exchange rate fluctuations, and perhaps most importantly, price-setting processes, but also national health and pharmaceutical policies and priorities. Current EU transfer pricing rules only address process rather than the resulting levels of pricing and reimbursement. Member States compare and reference price with each other (so called 'International Reference Pricing' or IRP). We aim to demonstrate that companies need to employ a range of different mechanisms to mitigate the effects of IRP. METHODS: We review how legislation and case law, including that relating to parallel trade or grey market, reinforces national rights to set prices. Current price constraints and their interpretation are considered. We then consider forthcoming proposals and the extent to which they may lead to greater pricing consistency. RESULTS: Based on a review of all nine cases that have proceeded to the EU courts, the principle of EU member state discretion in terms of price setting seems currently sacrosanct and it is unlikely that the legislators will be able to change this position. In order to balance the respective interests of the industry and member states, member states should allow differential pricing; restrict IRP to economically comparable Member States; exclude from IRP those elements related to pharmaceutical regulation and policies, which are country-specific and likely to distort price comparisons; and exclude from IRP and free movement provisions, those countries under austerity measures. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, manufacturers have limited strategies in terms of pri...
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.