Search

Process safety and risk analysis have paramount significance in the modern process industries for preventing fatalities and asset and reputation loss due to an accident. Hence, this has been an active area of research for many decades around the world. In this paper, a bibliometric analysis-based review is presented to investigate the evolution of process safety and risk research. Specifically, the following basic questions are addressed: (i) Which countries are active in the research? (ii) What are the key areas? (iii) Who are the leading contributing authors? (iv) What are the potential sources of the publications? (v) What is the focus of most of the documents? (vi) What are the dominant factors behind the citations? and (vii) What is the contribution of the industries? Additionally, the evolution and popularity of major tools used in this field are also analyzed. It is found that safety and risk analysis is a global topic. China, Malaysia, and Iran are the emerging countries with an impressive percentage increase in research volume in this decade (2009-2018). The USA is the leading contributor, and India is the most cost-effective country. Methodology development-related works cover the vast portion of this field, and journals focusing on these works are highly likely to be cited by peer researchers. Despite a healthy contribution from industry, unfortunately collaborative works between industry and academia are rare. It is also observed that the field of process safety and risk analysis is of great growth potential with an exponential increase in the number of annual publications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Process safety and risk analysis have paramount significance in the modern process industries for preventing fatalities and asset and reputation loss due to an accident. Hence, this has been an active area of research for many decades around the world. In this paper, a bibliometric analysis-based review is presented to investigate the evolution of process safety and risk research. Specifically, the following basic questions are addressed: (i) Which countries are active in the research? (ii) What are the key areas? (iii) Who are the leading contributing authors? (iv) What are the potential sources of the publications? (v) What is the focus of most of the documents? (vi) What are the dominant factors behind the citations? and (vii) What is the contribution of the industries? Additionally, the evolution and popularity of major tools used in this field are also analyzed. It is found that safety and risk analysis is a global topic. China, Malaysia, and Iran are the emerging countries with an impressive percentage increase in research volume in this decade (2009–2018). The USA is the leading contributor, and India is the most cost-effective country. Methodology development-related works cover the vast portion of this field, and journals focusing on these works are highly likely to be cited by peer researchers. Despite a healthy contribution from industry, unfortunately collaborative works between industry and academia are rare. It is also observed that the field of process safety and risk analysis is of great growth potential with an exponential increase in the number of annual publications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This paper shall first investigate the informatics areas and applications of the four Traditional Medicine systems - Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), Ayurveda, Traditional Arabic and Islamic Medicine and Traditional Malay Medicine. Then, this paper shall examine the national informatics infrastructure initiatives in the four respective countries that support the Traditional Medicine systems. Challenges of implementing informatics in Traditional Medicine Systems shall also be discussed.Methods: The literature was sourced from four databases: Ebsco Host, IEEE Explore, Proquest and Google scholar. The search term used was "Traditional Medicine", "informatics", "informatics infrastructure", "traditional Chinese medicine", "Ayurveda", "traditional Arabic and Islamic medicine", and "traditional malay medicine". A combination of the search terms above was also executed to enhance the searching process. A search was also conducted in Google to identify miscellaneous books, publications, and organization websites using the same terms.Results: Amongst major advancements in TCM and Ayurveda are bioinformatics, development of Traditional Medicine databases for decision system support, data mining and image processing. Traditional Chinese Medicine differentiates itself from other Traditional Medicine systems with documented ISO Standards to support the standardization of TCM. Informatics applications in Traditional Arabic and Islamic Medicine are mostly ehealth applications that focus more on spiritual healing, Islamic obligations and prophetic traditions. Literature regarding development of health informatics to support Traditional Malay Medicine is still insufficient. Major informatics infrastructure that is common in China and India are automated insurance payment systems for Traditional Medicine treatment. National informatics infrastructure in Middle East and Malaysia mainly cater for modern medicine. Other infrastructure such as telemedicine and hospital information systems focus its implementation in modern medicine or are not implemented and strategized at a national level to support Traditional Medicine.Conclusion: Informatics may not be able to address all the emerging areas of Traditional Medicine because the concepts in Traditional Medicine system of medicine are different from modern system, though the aim may be same, i.e., to give relief to the patient. Thus, there is a need to synthesize Traditional Medicine systems and informatics with involvements from modern system of medicine. Future research works may include filling the gaps of informatics areas and integrate national informatics infrastructure with established Traditional Medicine systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Ethnic Chinese and Indians in Malaysia are deemed perpetual diasporas. • Malay hegemony sees the linguistic citizenship of non-Malays as foreign. • However, non-Malays claimed their language behaviours prove their Malaysianness. • Their discourses revealed contradictions in their perceived linguistic citizenship. This paper analyzes contradictory tensions in the linguistic citizenship of Chinese- and Indian-Malaysian youths. Malay ethnonationalism describes the languages of the local Chinese and Indian minorities as immigrant. A sociological perspective, however, tells us it is difficult to see these communities as diasporic. They hold Malaysian state citizenship, they may have no contact with China and India, and in some cases their ancestors settled in Malaysia centuries ago. This paper analyzes how, in that sociopolitical context, a cohort of Chinese- and Indian-Malaysian youths constructed their linguistic citizenship within a series of 16 semi-structured folk linguistic group discussions about multilingualism in contemporary Malaysia. The paper reveals two parallel discourses. Malay ethnonationalism has prompted discourses of linguistic allegiance to China and India as prescribed, if not impractical, homelands. However, the youths also divorced their languages and communities from India and China to instead forge a non-diasporic linguistic citizenship. In doing so, they negated Malaysia's linguistic hierarchy, despite Malay ethnonationalist discourses, by describing their unique interethnic language practices as quintessentially Malaysian and as an interethnic leveller. Malaysia showcases how linguistic citizenship in the diaspora can be both vexed by historical sociopolitical processes as well as empowered by sociopolitical resistance, resulting in contradictory discourses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This paper discusses national programs implemented in India, Pakistan, Malaysia, and Philippines to generate and apply evidence in making informed policy decisions on the approval, pricing, reimbursement and financing of medicines, diagnostics, and medical devices. Approval: In all countries, the Ministries of Health are generally responsible for approval of health technologies through various agencies like the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation in India, Bureau of Food and Drugs for medicines and Bureau of Health Devices and Technology for medical devices in the Philippines, the National Pharmaceutical Control Bureau, Health Technology Assessment Unit and Medical Device Bureau in Malaysia, and the Drug Control Organization in Pakistan. Product dossiers are evaluated while taking decisions. Pricing Control: India has a strong price control mechanism through the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority. In the Philippines, the Essential Drug Price Monitoring System monitors prices of 37 essential drugs monthly from all drugstore outlets nationwide. In Malaysia and Pakistan registration pricing of new drugs is negotiated/fixed by the government with the vendor. Reimbursement: A mix of social, voluntary private and community-based health insurance plans are available in India while the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation is responsible for reimbursement of drugs and medical devices in the Philippines. In Malaysia no formal reimbursement system is being practiced, and in Pakistan the government reimburses medical claims of its employees. Financing: In both India and the Philippines the bulk of health expenditure is out of pocket while the government pays for 20% and 28% respectively in both countries. The public health care services in Malaysia are heavily subsidized by the government with minimum fee being charged to the public. The government of Pakistan gives free medicines to its citizens at the public health facilities. Conclusions: In the region under discussion, one of the priority areas that the different regulatory agencies would benefit from is human resource development to facilitate the process of evidence based assessment of health technologies. Higher budgetary allocation and stronger legislation is also needed along with interagency and international coordination and cooperation to harmonize. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Asia’s largest biofuels producers are currently Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, China and India. This paper first examines the current status of biofuels in these countries, including the national development targets, strategies, incentives and policies. It then identifies the fundamental driving forces behind the development and promotion of these industries and considers their economic, social and environmental impacts. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]