OBJECTIVE: This review paper aimed to shed light on the skin-whitening ingredients and their issues related to safety, health risk, and halal status.
METHODOLOGY: Based on the reviews scientific publications published from January 2015 to July 2020 using Web of Science and Scopus engines.
FINDINGS: Based on the review, most of the common ingredients in the skin-whitening products are originated from plants, animals, microbes, and heavy metals. Health risk of the ingredients was evaluated based on the usage, chronic or acute adverse effect, frequency of incidence, and the hazardous chemical contents of a halal cosmetics. The halal status of the ingredients was investigated based on the sources of origin, safety evaluation, and associated health risk of the ingredients.
ORIGINALITY: This review shows that ingredients play a vital role in the halal status decision-making of a cosmetic product. Therefore, the categories of Halal-Safe, Haram-Prohibited, and Critical-Need further evaluation were suggested to integrate the sources of ingredients with safety.
METHODS: We searched the official Web sites and homepages of the responsible leading patient safety agencies of the three countries. We reviewed all publicly available guidelines, regulatory documents, government reports that included policies, guidelines, strategy papers, reports, evaluation programs, as well as scientific articles and gray literature related to the incident reporting system. We used the World Health Organization components of patient safety reporting system as the guidelines for comparison and analyzed the documents using descriptive comparative analysis.
RESULTS: Taiwan had the most incidents reported, followed by Malaysia and Indonesia. Taiwan Patient Safety Reporting (TPR) and the Malaysian Reporting and Learning System had similar attributes and followed the World Health Organization components for incident reporting. We found differences between the Indonesian system and both of TPR and the Malaysian system. Indonesia did not have an external reporting deadline, analysis and learning were conducted at the national level, and there was a lack of transparency and public access to data and reports. All systems need to establish a clear and structured incident reporting evaluation framework if they are to be successful.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TPR and Malaysian system, the Indonesian patient safety incident reporting system seemed to be ineffective because it failed to acquire adequate national incident reporting data and lacked transparency; these deficiencies inhibited learning at the national level. We suggest further research on the implementation at the hospital level to see how far national guidelines and policy have been implemented in each country.
AREAS COVERED: We searched multiple databases, including PubMed, Web of Knowledge, Scopus, ACM, Embase, IEEE and Ingenta. We explored various evaluation aspects of MD and EMR to gain a better understanding of their complex integration. We reviewed numerous risk management and assessment frameworks related to MD and EMR security aspects and mitigation controls and then identified their common evaluation aspects. Our review indicated that previous evaluation frameworks assessed MD and EMR independently. To address this gap, we proposed an evaluation framework based on the sociotechnical dimensions of health information systems and risk assessment approaches for MDs to evaluate MDI-EMR integratively.
EXPERT OPINION: The emergence of MDI-EMR cyber threats requires appropriate evaluation tools to ensure the safe development and application of MDI-EMR. Consequently, our proposed framework will continue to evolve through subsequent validations and refinements. This process aims to establish its applicability in informing stakeholders of the safety level and assessing its effectiveness in mitigating risks for future improvements.