MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1552947341 · doi:10.18433/j32s3n

Functional Food and Nutraceutical Registration Processes in Japan and China: A Diffusion of Innovation Perspective

2008· article· en· W1552947341 on OpenAlex
Darshika Patel, Yvon Dufour, Neil Domigan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNewspaperChinaProcess (computing)NutraceuticalBusinessMarketingPolitical scienceRegional scienceAdvertisingComputer scienceMedicineGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose - This paper looks into the functional food and nutraceutical registration processes in Japan and China. The Japanese have developed the Foods for Specified Health Use (FOSHU) registration process whereas the Chinese have put into place the Health Food (HF) registration process. The aim of this paper is to compare the regulation processes between the two countries in search for answers to three core empirical questions: (1) how have the registration processes developed and changed? (2) What are the similarities and differences between the processes of registration in the two countries investigated? (3) Why are the registration processes similar/different? Method - The study was conducted using secondary sources. The literature surveyed covered academic journals, trade journals, magazine and newspaper articles, market reports, proceedings, books and web pages of relevant regulatory authorities and regulatory consultants. Information from the more recently published sources was used preferentially over older sources. As well as using the most recent sources, information was selected on the basis of which source it was from. Official regulations and SFDA and MHLW websites would contain accurate and up to date information and information from here would be taken as true over other sources of information. Results - The two diagrams of the registration processes respectively in Japan and China clearly show that there are similarities and differences. There are six categories under which these can be found: (1) the scientific evidence required; (2) the application process; (3) the evaluation process; (4) the law and the categories of products; (5) the labels and the types of claims; and finally (6) the cost and the time involved. Conclusions -The data analysis suggests that the process of diffusion of innovation played a role in the development of the regulations. Further it was found that while Japan was at the outset a pioneer innovator in nutraceutical registration processes, there are indications that in more recent years it too imitated other countries. NOVELTY STATEMENT: The assortment of regulatory regimes creates much uncertainty for the firms and the lack of familiarity and poor knowledge of the regulatory situation increases the risk of failure. The research presented in this paper provides highly valuable information to any biotech/pharmaceutical/nutraceutical companies developing their market entry strategy in Japan and China. There are few national and international studies of drug registration application processes but even fewer comparative studies of functional food and neutraceutical registration application processes such as this one and none using a diffusion of innovation perspective.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score0.712

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it