1,720,991 research outputs found
Perspectives on Limitations to Patentability- Report No. I of a Webinar Series on Reinterpreting TRIPS in the Life Sciences
No full textThis report is based on the material and input that was presented and discussed at the webinar with the title: “Perspectives on limitations to patentability”. The Webinar and the theme where introduced by Prof. Timo Minssen. Then Prof. Nari Lee gave a presentation introducing some of the context and considerations related to TRIPS art 27 and the concept of technological neutrality. This was followed by Dr. Mike Snodin presentation on some central points and arguments from his recent article considering the so-called “Correa Guidelines” and their compatibility with the obligations enshrined in TRIPS art 27. After the introduction and the two presentations, the open discussion turned to questions, comments and considerations of related issues such as the need for alternative incentives, purpose bound product protection, user driven solutions and post-grant instruments. Suggested citation: Wested, Jakob and Minssen, Timo, Trips and the Life Sciences - Perspectives on Limitations to Patentability (June 15, 2017). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2986751<br/
Kønsrepræsentation i klinisk forskning
No full textSundhedsstyrelsen og Lægemiddelstyrelsen har i samarbejde undersøgt kønsrepræsentationen i klinisk forskning omhandlende sygdomme, der rammer både mænd og kvinder, på baggrund af aftalen om fordelingen af forskningsreserven 2024. Formålet med undersøgelsen er at:1) belyse regler og politikker, der regulerer kønsrepræsentation i klinisk forskning 2) kortlægge evidensen for kønsrepræsentation i klinisk forskning3) belyse faktorer, der har betydning for til- og fravalg af deltagelse i klinisk forskning4) kortlægge kønsrepræsentationen i kliniske forsøg, som ligger til grund for lægemiddelgodkendelser
Governing prospects, navigating minefields and protecting interests:Legal issues in big data driven biotech- & biomedical innovation
No full textTransparency policies and the increased technological ability to gather and process large amounts of data has created new possibilities and innovation dynamics to be seized and new legal and ethical issues to be addressed in the biomedical area, where particularly overlapping legal claims are a central issue. Patent claims, intellectual property rights and sui generis rights for data collections, trade secrets, regulatory data protection and the protection of personal data forms a complex legal framework applying to the data supposed to fuel big data driven biomedical advances. Two of the central issues in this landscape of rights and regulation are the problem of data aggregation and of data transparency. This presentation will focus on the role of Clinical research 2.0 in driving the development of personalized medicine as well as Orphan drugs and the legal issues arising in this context related to data protection (GDPR) as well as IPR.<br/
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
