Open Access

Background: The most important attribute to which all human beings aspire is good health because it enables us to undertake different forms of activities of daily living. The emergence of scientific knowledge in Western societies has enabled scientists to explore and define several parameters of health by drawing boundaries around factors that are known to influence the attainment of good health. For example, the World Health Organization defined health by taking physical and psychological factors into consideration. Their definition of health also included a caveat that says, “not merely the absence of sickness.” This definition has guided scientists and health care providers in the Western world in the development of health care programs in non-Western societies. Objective: However, ethnomedical beliefs about the cause(s) of illness have given rise to alternative theories of health, sickness, and treatment approaches in the developing world. Thus, there is another side to the story. Method: Much of the population in developing countries lives in rural settings where the knowledge of health, sickness, and care has evolved over centuries of practice and experience. The definition of health in these settings tends to orient toward cultural beliefs, traditional practices, and social relationships. Invariably, whereas biomedicine is the dominant medical system in Western societies, traditional medicine — or ethno-medicine — is often the first port of call for patients in developing countries. Results: The 2 medical systems represent, and are influenced by, the cultural environment in which they exist. On one hand, biomedicine is very effective in the treatment of objective, measurable disease conditions. On the other hand, ethnomedicine is effective in the management of illness conditions or the experience of disease states. Nevertheless, an attempt to supplant 1 system of care with another from a different cultural environment could pose enormous challenges in non-Western societies. Conclusion: In general, we, as human beings, are guided in our health care decisions by past experiences, family and friends, social networks, cultural beliefs, customs, tradition, professional knowledge, and intuition. No medical system has been shown to address all of these elements; hence, the need for collaboration, acceptance, and partnership between all systems of care in cultural communities. In developing countries, the roads to health are incomplete without an examination of the intersection of culture and healing. Perhaps mutual exclusiveness rather inclusiveness of these 2 dominant health systems is the greatest obstacle to health in developing countries.

Self-medication is of great public health importance as it often bypasses regulatory mechanisms to assure quality of health care. Nevertheless there are no established standards on how to assess self-medication. We therefore intended to systematically retrieve questionnaires and survey tools used to capture self-medication, with the aim to identify the scope of information investigated in this context and commonalities between the tools. We conducted a systematic review of the literature on questionnaires used for self-medication assessment by searching PubMed and Web of Science databases using the combinations of following keywords; self-medication, self-prescription, non-prescription, questionnaire. Truncation was used to ensure retrieval of all possible variations of search terms. The search was limited to articles published between 1st January 2000 and 31st December 2015, human studies and English language. Duplicate and irrelevant studies were excluded from the final review. A total of 158 studies were included in the review. Studies were from diverse geographical locations, most of the studies were from Nigeria 16 (10.1%) followed by India 10 (6.3%) and Iran 8 (5%). Forty-three studies (27.2%) focused on antibiotic self-medication. Majority of the studies (106; 67%) were done with adult populations. The components addressed by the questionnaires covered: reasons for self-medications in 147 (93%) studies, purchasing source in 136 (86%) studies, medical conditions to be treated in 153 (96.8%) studies, adverse events in 67 (42.4%) studies, use of prescribing information in 24 (15.1%) studies and antibiotic resistance awareness in 20 (46.5%) antibiotic studies. For 74 (46.8%) studies, survey questionnaires were self-administered and most studies (57; 36%) were done at homes of respondents. Thirty-seven (23.4%) studies did not report any recall period for self-medication practices. Study response rates varied from 17.9% to 100%, and while validity of the study questionnaire was reported for 100 (63.3%) studies, 15 (9.5%) studies reported reliability test of the study questionnaire. There is a large variety of questionnaires being used for investigating self-medication practices making comparability and meta-analyses very difficult. It is desirable to have a basic set of standardized survey questions on this topic to make available for future research groups in this field.

The drugs we use to treat any condition – from an innocuous cough to a life-threatening cancer – are the outcome of painstaking human clinical trials. These trials are the only way to credibly determine the safety and efficacy of drugs. In recent years there has been a clear shift in clinical trial sites from core developed countries like USA, European countries to developing countries like India, China, South American countries. This shift is related to challenges and opportunities like costs of trials, recruitment issues, and regulatory challenges in developed vs. developing countries. Developing countries and developed countries have their unique disease burden patterns based on various parameters like but not limited to age, health care facilities, health insurance, sanitary conditions, environmental issues, education, nutrition and GDP. Previous studies have reported that many of the important global diseases are not much explored in clinical trials and many published clinical trials have very less international health relevance. This study was aimed at finding the correlation between disease burdens, number of clinical trials done and trial success rates. We compared 2005 - 2010 Global Burden of Disease data for Germany, India and number of clinical trials from clinicaltrials.gov database done in the same period. Our findings indicated that there was a good correlation between the disease burden and clinical trials for Germany in 2005 and 2010. For India in 2005 there was a moderate positive correlation, 2010 data showed the improvement in India in terms of match between disease burden and clinical trials. But careful observation of the data shows still a need for more trials on Communicable, maternal, neonatal and nutritional disorders.

The world health organization defines musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) as “a disorder of muscles, tendons, peripheral vascular system not directly resulting from an acute or instantaneous event.1 Work related MSDs are one of the most important occupational hazards.1 Among many other occupations, dentistry is a highly demanding profession that requires good visual acuity, hearing, depth perception, psychomotor skills, manual dexterity, and ability to maintain occupational postures over long periods.

The use of secondary data in health care research has become a very important issue over the past few years. Data from the treatment context are being used for evaluation of medical data for external quality assurance, as well as to answer medical questions in the form of registers and research databases. Additionally, the establishment of electronic clinical systems like data warehouses provides new opportunities for the secondary use of clinical data. Because health data is among the most sensitive information about an individual, the data must be safeguarded from disclosure.