DOCSLIB.ORG

International Comparison of Ten Medical Regulatory Systems: Egypt

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

THE ARTS This PDF document was made available from www.rand.org as a public CHILD POLICY service of the RAND Corporation. CIVIL JUSTICE EDUCATION ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT Jump down to document6 HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research NATIONAL SECURITY POPULATION AND AGING organization providing objective analysis and effective PUBLIC SAFETY solutions that address the challenges facing the public SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY and private sectors around the world. SUBSTANCE ABUSE TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE Support RAND WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore RAND Europe View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. This product is part of the RAND Corporation technical report series. Reports may include research findings on a specific topic that is limited in scope; present discus- sions of the methodology employed in research; provide literature reviews, survey instruments, modeling exercises, guidelines for practitioners and research profes- sionals, and supporting documentation; or deliver preliminary findings. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure that they meet high standards for re- search quality and objectivity. International Comparison of Ten Medical Regulatory Systems Egypt, Germany, Greece, India, Italy, Nigeria, Pakistan, Poland, South Africa and Spain Han de Vries, Paul Sanderson, Barbara Janta, Lila Rabinovich, Fragiskos Archontakis, Sharif Ismail, Lisa Klautzer, Sonja Marjanovic, Bhanu Patruni, Samir Puri, Jan Tiessen Prepared for the UK General Medical Council EUROPE The study does not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of the UK General Medical Council nor is it bound by its conclusions. The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. R® is a registered trademark. © Copyright 2009 UK General Medical Council All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the UK General Medical Council. Published 2009 by the RAND Corporation 1776 Main Street, P.O. Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138 1200 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA 22202-5050 4570 Fifth Avenue, Suite 600, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-2665 Westbrook Centre, Milton Road, Cambridge CB4 1YG, United Kingdom RAND URL: http://www.rand.org RAND Europe URL: http://www.rand.org/randeurope To order RAND documents or to obtain additional information, contact Distribution Services: Telephone: (310) 451-7002; Fax: (310) 451-6915; Email: [email protected] Preface This study was commissioned by the General Medical Council (GMC) to provide an evidence base on the systems of medical regulation in place in the countries of origin of doctors seeking to enter the UK and obtain registration to practise. The countries selected for analysis by the GMC are the countries of origin of the ten largest groups of non-UK qualified doctors registered in the UK: Egypt, Germany, Greece, India, Italy, Nigeria, Pakistan, Poland, South Africa and Spain. RAND Europe is an independent not-for-profit policy research organisation that aims to improve policy and decision making in the public interest, through research and analysis. RAND Europe’s clients include European governments, institutions, NGOs and firms with a need for rigorous, independent, multidisciplinary analysis. This report has been peer-reviewed in accordance with RAND’s quality assurance standards. For more information about RAND Europe or this document, please contact Lila Rabinovich. RAND Europe Westbrook Centre Milton Road Cambridge CB4 1YG United Kingdom Tel. +44 (1223) 353 329 iii Contents Preface ........................................................................................................................ iii List of Figures .............................................................................................................. ix List of Tables ............................................................................................................... xi Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................xiii Glossary ......................................................................................................... 1 Executive summary ..................................................................................................... 5 CHAPTER 1 Introduction ................................................................................... 15 1.1 Objective of this study ..................................................................................... 15 1.2 Motivation and Background ............................................................................ 16 1.3 Research Questions ......................................................................................... 18 1.4 Structure of the report ..................................................................................... 18 CHAPTER 2 Research approach ......................................................................... 21 2.1 Development of a Typology of Medical Regulation ......................................... 21 2.2 Data collection: Literature review and key informant interviews ...................... 22 2.3 Comparative analysis ....................................................................................... 22 2.4 Conclusions and recommendations ................................................................. 23 CHAPTER 3 Medical regulation in Egypt ........................................................... 25 3.1 Overview ......................................................................................................... 25 3.2 Structure and nature of medical regulation ...................................................... 26 3.3 Registration process and requirements ............................................................. 29 3.4 Standards & ethics .......................................................................................... 29 3.5 Fitness to practise (FTP) and related disciplinary procedures and sanctions ......................................................................................................... 30 3.6 Medical education ........................................................................................... 32 3.7 Continuing education and revalidation............................................................ 33 CHAPTER 4 Medical regulation in Germany ...................................................... 37 4.1 Overview ......................................................................................................... 37 4.2 Structure and nature of medical regulation ...................................................... 37 4.3 Registration process and requirements ............................................................. 40 v RAND Europe 4.4 Standards & ethics ........................................................................................... 42 4.5 Fitness to practise and related disciplinary procedures and sanctions ................ 45 4.6 Medical education ........................................................................................... 48 CHAPTER 5 Medical regulation in Greece.......................................................... 51 5.1 Overview ......................................................................................................... 51 5.2 Structure and nature of medical regulation ...................................................... 51 5.3 Registration process and requirements ............................................................. 54 5.4 Revalidation .................................................................................................... 55 5.5 Standards & ethics ........................................................................................... 56 5.6 Fitness to practise (FTP) and related disciplinary procedures and sanctions .......................................................................................................... 57 5.7 Medical education ........................................................................................... 59 CHAPTER 6 Medical regulation in India ............................................................ 61 6.1 Overview ......................................................................................................... 61 6.2 Structure and nature of medical regulation ...................................................... 61 6.3 Registration process and requirements ............................................................
Recommended publications
  • “General Optical Council” (Goc) -Further Evidence for This Council Itself to Be “Struck Off.” the Day-2 Fitness to Practise Transcript!

    “General Optical Council” (Goc) -Further Evidence for This Council Itself to Be “Struck Off.” the Day-2 Fitness to Practise Transcript!

    Advances in Ophthalmology & Visual System Review Article Open Access “General optical council” (goc) -further evidence for this council itself to be “struck off.” the day-2 fitness to practise transcript! Abstract Volume 6 Issue 5 - 2017 At last! An honest journal serves the public. Regulatory bodies protect the public? Not always. Best known is US Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) corruption. Dr David Sydney J Bush Head of Faculty of Optometry & Cardio Retinometry, Graham forced Merck Corporation to withdraw FDA approved VIOXX, (139,000 heart Cosmopolitan University Director Institute of attacks -30-40% fatal.) FDA defended Aspartame claimed “non-toxic” in completely CardioRetinometry, UK unknown total daily “expected usage” since 1974, against New Mexico’s and Hawaii’s attempted prosecutions. Contaminating multitudinous foods, consumption is unknown. Correspondence: Sydney J Bush, Skidby House, Head of Metabolites, formic acid (cyanotic) formaldehyde (genotoxic, neurotoxic) and methyl Faculty of Optometry & Cardio Retinometry, Cosmopolitan alcohol (blindness) are never safe. Grandmal seizures are suspected. A worse, hidden University, Director Institute of CardioRetinometry, Skidby problem exists with the UK’s General Optical Council colluding with corrupt medicine, England HU16 5TF, UK, Tel 00441482841842, far transcending aspartame poisoning, trivial comparably, condemning every man, woman Email and child; even the unborn to heart attack and early death. Insidiously, originating in the 1920s, corruption grew, becoming open war between the author´s nutritional Optometry, Received: April 03, 2017 | Published: April 07, 2017 and NHS doctors risking imprisonment for perjury, threatening cooperative doctors in 2003, defended by the GOC preserving heart attacks and NHS disease dependent jobs, also protected by censored, peer reviewed banned scientific papers and `NICE.´ Method: Public notices challenged authority.
  • DENTAL COUNCIL of INDIA NOTIFICATION New Delhi, Dated

    DENTAL COUNCIL of INDIA NOTIFICATION New Delhi, Dated

    [To be published in the Gazette of India, Part III, section 4.] DENTAL COUNCIL OF INDIA NOTIFICATION New Delhi, dated , 2006. No--------.- In exercise of the powers conferred by section 10A read with section 20 of the Dentists Act, 1948 (16 of 1948), the Dental Council of India with the previous approval of the Central Government, in supersession of the Establishment of new Dental Colleges, opening of higher courses of study and increase of admission capacity in dental colleges Regulations 1993, except as respects things done or omitted to be done before such supersession, hereby makes the following regulations relating to establishment of new dental colleges, opening of new or higher course of study or training and increase of admission capacity in dental colleges, namely:- 1. Short title and commencement:- (1) These regulations may be called the Dental Council of India (Establishment of New Dental Colleges, Opening of New or Higher Course of Study or Training and Increase of Admission Capacity in Dental Colleges) Regulations, 2006. (2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette. 2. Applicability.- These regulations shall be applicable to the proposals relating to the following from the academic year 2006-07: (a) establishment of a new dental college at the under-graduate level; (b) introduction of a new or higher course of study or training at the post-graduate level (diploma and degree both);and (c) increase of admission capacity in a dental college at the under- graduate or post-graduate level: Provided that the dental colleges established or permitted to increase the admission capacity at the under-graduate level before the commencement of these regulations will continue to be governed by the Establishment of new Dental Colleges, opening of higher courses of study and increase of admission capacity in dental colleges Regulations, 1993.
  • Medical Values in a Commercial Age

    Medical Values in a Commercial Age

    Proceedings of the British Academy, 78, 149-163 Medical Values in a Commercial Age W.F. BYNUM Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine EVENthe phrase ‘Victorian values’ is a reminder that historians write about themselves as well as the past. A volume with this title has different reverberations for us than it would have had for a historian of Lytton Strachey’s generation, and even the inclusion of a paper on medicine testifies to recent changes in historical perceptions and practice. Neither science nor medicine rated a chapter in G.M. Young’s Early Victorian Britain, and only three decades ago, Walter Houghton’s Victorian Frame of Mind contained but one brief reference to medicine and only cursory material on what is now seen as a much more central Victorian preoccupation: health.1 The army doctor and sanitary reformer Edmund Parkes (1819-1875) was speaking as a Victorian as much as he was as a doctor when he urged young doctors ‘Never [to] think of your life, but always of your health, which alone can make life useful’.2 Parkes’s coupling of health and usefulness was high praise indeed, for usefulness could easily have served alongside Duty, Thrift and Self-Help as a marketable volume by that quintessential Victorian Samuel Smiles, himself of course originally a trained doctor. In fact, an episode in Smiles’s early career points to the theme which I shall discuss here. After a medical Read 13 December 1990. 0The British Academy 1992. G.M. Young (ed.), Early Victorian England, 1830-1865, 2 vols (London, 19h); Walter Houghton, The Victorian Frame of Mind, 1830-1870 (New Haven, 1957).
  • I USA Community Colleges, STEM Learning Ecosystems and Their

    I USA Community Colleges, STEM Learning Ecosystems and Their

    I USA Community Colleges, STEM Learning Ecosystems and Their Role in STEM For the Nation…How does this inform the Israel Technical Colleges and the New STEM Ecosystems? Jan Morrison, Founder and Senior Partner, TIES 26 March 2020 1500 -1930 WHAT IS STEM? WHAT ISN’T STEM? FIRST 10 YEARS! STEM It’s a fundamental opportunity to solve our world’s most STEM Is A Mindset grand challenges! It’s a fundamental opportunity to be competent to create, design and implement innovative tools! It’s Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, Design Thinking/Literacy, Computational Thinking/Literacy, Digital Arts, Agriculture and Areas Not Currently Known! Success is linked to the Measurement of What Works and Why! STEM FOR ALL BUT DESIGNED FOR EACH STEM for ALL is Aligned with Workforce! STEM HAPPENS EVERYWHERE!! © 2016 Teaching Institute for Excellence in STEM INFORMAL FORMAL HOME © 2017 Teaching Institute for Excellence in STEM © 2017 Teaching Institute for Excellence in STEM BUSINESS/INDUSTRY COLLABORATION IS NOT A NATURAL ACT… ENLIGHTENED SELF-INTEREST IS!!! STEM SUPPORTS A REDESIGN OF TEACHING AND LEARNING AT ALL GRADE LEVELS What About… 1890’S ELLIOTT REPORT Nanobiotechnology? BIOLOGY Genetic Engineering? Bioinformatics? CHEMISTRY Aquaponics? Biophysical Engineering? PHYSICS STEM IS NEW TOOLS, NEW SKILLS ALL DRIVEN BY 21ST CENTURY SKILLS Not Just Hands-On but Solving REAL Problems CAPSTONE PROJECTS TO SOLVE ISRAEL’S GRANDEST CHALLENGES WHAT IS A STEM ECOSYSTEM AND WHY IS IT NEEDED? Unprecedented Global Competition Shanghai - Singapore 1987 1965
  • 1Tft -I DENTAL COUNCIL of INDIA

    1Tft -I DENTAL COUNCIL of INDIA

    1Tft -i DENTAL COUNCIL OF INDIA (A STATUTORY BODY CONSTITUTED UNDER THE DENTISTS ACT, 1948) Speed Post/E-mail No.Z-34034/1/2016-Admin/ Z3'[ Dated the May, 2021 GENERAL CIRCULAR j J The Government of India, vide its order No. V.12025/51/2021-DE dated 11.05.2021 ordered that "Dr. Ashok Khandelwal, Member of DCI, may discharge the functions of the President, DCI with immediate effect and fill election takes place for the said post or any other order issued relevant to the said post, whichever is earlier. This tempora,y arrangement shall be subject to any litigation in the matter pending before any Court of law". A copy of the said order is attached herewith for information and ready reference of all the concerned. This issues with the prior approval of the President, DCI in terms the said order of Government of India. Officiating Secretary / Copy for information to 1.The Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, (DE Section), Maulana Azad Road, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi- 110011. 2.The Director General of Health Services, Government of India, Nirman Bhawan, Maulana Azad Road, New Delhi - 110011 3.All the Members of the Dental Council of India. 4.The Chairman, Union Public Service Commission, Dholpur House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi -110069. 5.The Secretaries of Medical & Health of all the State Government & UT's. 6.All the Directors of Medical & Health Service/Medical Education & Research of all the State Government & UT's. 7.The Principal/Dean of all the Dental Colleges in the country.
  • Check Your Optician Is Registered Gocpatientsbooklet1qx 5/8/10 11:30 Page 2

    Check Your Optician Is Registered Gocpatientsbooklet1qx 5/8/10 11:30 Page 2

    GOCPatientsBooklet1QX 5/8/10 11:30 Page 1 Check your optician is registered GOCPatientsBooklet1QX 5/8/10 11:30 Page 2 This booklet tells you who we, the General Optical Council (GOC), are. It also tells you what we do and how our services can help you. About us We regulate opticians, students training to be opticians and optical businesses in the UK. There are currently around 23,500 optometrists, dispensing opticians, student opticians and optical businesses on our registers. Our powers come from the Opticians Act 1989. What do the different words mean? An optometrist is the person who tests your sight. They can also fit and supply glasses or contact lenses. A dispensing optician is the person who fits and supplies your glasses or contact lenses. Ophthalmologists and ophthalmic medical practitioners (OMPs) are medically-qualified doctors who specialise in eye conditions. They are also allowed to test your sight and fit and supply glasses and contact lenses. Ophthalmologists and OMPs are registered by the General Medical Council. In this booklet we describe optometrists and dispensing opticians as ‘opticians’. 2 We describe people who are registered with us as ‘registrants’. We use these terms to make it clearer for you. What is regulation? Regulators protect the public by: • restricting who can practise a profession; • making sure that their registrants are suitably qualified; and • making sure that their registrants are fit to practise safely. We are one of nine healthcare regulators in the UK. The other regulators are: • the General Chiropractic Council; • the General Dental Council; • the General Medical Council; • the General Osteopathic Council; • the Health Professions Council; • the Nursing and Midwifery Council; • the Pharmaceutical Society of Northern Ireland; and • the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain.
  • Medical Ethics: for Self-Regulation of Medical Profession and Practice

    Medical Ethics: for Self-Regulation of Medical Profession and Practice

    MEDICAL ETHICS FOR SELF-REGULATION OF MEDICAL PROFESSION AND PRACTICE Aditi Iyer Amar Jesani CEHAT Prepared for Independent Commission on Health in India 40 Institutional Area, South of IIT New Delhi 110 016 Centre for Enquiry into Health and Allied Themes, Research Centre of Anusandhan Trust, Survey No. 2804 & 2805, Aaram Society Road, Vakola, Santacruz East, Mumbai – 400055, Maharashtra, India; Ph:(+91-22) 26673154, 26673571; Fax : 26673156; Email :[email protected]; www.cehat.org CONTENTS Acknowledgements 1. Self-regulation of Medical Profession: Concept and History 2. The Political Economy of Medical Malpractice 3. Regulation of the Medical Profession: The Scope of Legislation 4. The Functioning of Councils 5. Conclusions and recommendations References and Bibliography 1 Acknowledgements The data collection from the statutory and professional bodies responsible to implement codes of medical ethics is always a difficult task. The experience in this study is not so different in that sense. However, we were fortunate in meeting few individuals who showed some interest in the study and answered our questions. We thank all of them. Our involvement and interaction with the Forum for Medical Ethics Society and its experiences in contesting the “rigged” elections of the Maharashtra Medical Council gave us insight into the functioning of professional bodies. We are thankful to its members. We are also thankful to nurses, doctors and health activists who discussed with us on the subject from time to time. This study was done for the Independent Commission on Health in India (ICHI). The study would have benefited a lot from the participants of the workshop that ICHI had promised to organise to discuss this as well other studies.
  • The State of Medical Education and Practice in the UK: 2013

    The State of Medical Education and Practice in the UK: 2013

    Summary: The state of medical education and practice in the UK: 2013 Our third report on the state of The changing shape of the profession medical education and practice uses and medical education (chapter 1) General Medical Council (GMC) Shape of the profession since 2007 The number of doctors on the register has increased and other data to provide a picture substantially from 244,540 doctors in 2007 to of the medical profession in the 252,553 in 2012. UK and to identify some of the Overall, the most substantial change in this period challenges it faces. has been the growth in the number of female doctors. But now this seems to be slowing: 55% of We hope this report will encourage discussion and medical students were female in 2012, compared debate about some of the practical steps we and with 61% in 2003 and 57% in 2007. others could take in better supporting doctors and improving patient care. 27% of doctors on the register were international medical graduates in 2012, but the supply of these This year we have focused on complaints to the GMC doctors is reducing and the group is ageing. The to see if we can understand more about them and number of international medical graduates under 30 whether they can help us identify areas of risk within years old decreased by 61% between 2007 and 2012. medical practice. Graduates from the UK and European Economic Area (EEA) are now filling this gap as fewer international But the report needs to be seen in the wider context medical graduates are able to start postgraduate – the overall standard of medical practice in the UK training in the UK.
  • Performance Review

    Performance Review

    Annual review of performance 2017/18 General Chiropractic Council About the Professional Standards Authority The Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care1 promotes the health, safety and wellbeing of patients, service users and the public by raising standards of regulation and voluntary registration of people working in health and care. We are an independent body, accountable to the UK Parliament. We oversee the work of nine statutory bodies that regulate health professionals in the UK and social workers in England. We review the regulators’ performance and audit and scrutinise their decisions about whether people on their registers are fit to practise. We also set standards for organisations holding voluntary registers for people in unregulated health and care occupations and accredit those organisations that meet our standards. To encourage improvement, we share good practice and knowledge, conduct research and introduce new ideas including our concept of right-touch regulation.2 We monitor policy developments in the UK and internationally and provide advice to governments and others on matters relating to people working in health and care. We also undertake some international commissions to extend our understanding of regulation and to promote safety in the mobility of the health and care workforce. We are committed to being independent, impartial, fair, accessible and consistent. More information about our work and the approach we take is available at www.professionalstandards.org.uk. 1 The Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care was previously known as the Council for Healthcare Regulatory Excellence 2 Right-touch regulation revised (October 2015). Available at www.professionalstandards.org.uk/policy-and-research/right-touch-regulation Contents 1.
  • David Little- (01-10284) ______

    David Little- (01-10284) ______

    BEFORE THE FITNESS TO PRACTISE COMMITTEE OF THE GENERAL OPTICAL COUNCIL GENERAL OPTICAL COUNCIL F(20)43 AND DAVID LITTLE- (01-10284) ___________________________________________________________________ DETERMINATION OF A SUBSTANTIVE HEARING AGREED PANEL DISPOSAL (ADP) 8 APRIL 2021 ___________________________________________________________________ Committee Members: Mr Ian Crookall (Chair/Lay) Ms Asmita Naik (Lay) Mr Mark McLaren (Lay) Ms Kalpana Theophilus (Optometrist) Mr Amit Jinabhai (Optometrist) Legal adviser: Ms Megan Ashworth GOC Presenting Officer: Ms Alecsandra Manning-Rees Registrant: Not present but represented in his absence Registrant representative: Jane Oldfield [Counsel] Muna Rashid [AOP] Hearings Officer: Ms A Shabani Facts found proved: 1(a)-(g); 2(a)-(g); 3(a)-(i); 4(a)-(i); 5(a)-(h); 6(a)-(h); 7(a)-(g); 8(a)-(j); 9; and 10 Facts not found proved: none Misconduct: Yes Impairment: Currently Impaired Sanction: Suspension Order 12 months, no review ordered Immediate order: No ___________________________________________________________________ ALLEGATION The Council alleges that you, David Little, a registered optometrist whilst working at [redacted]: 1. In response to a request from NHS Dumfries & Galloway you resubmitted Patient A’s record card for the examination dated 10 June 2014 however before doing so you added the following information: a. “Trop.5%” [Tropicomide 0.5% eye drops] with a batch number; and/or b. the word “smooth” or “smoker” to the “Convergence” box; and/or c. Motility now described as being full; and/or d. Illegible written text, appearing to be “no Driver”, next to “PC” in the “ACC” box; and/or e. the words “macula clear” added in the “Ophthalmoscopy” box; and/or f. Distance and near phorias now quantified; and/or.
  • The General Medical Council: Fit to Practise?

    The General Medical Council: Fit to Practise?

    Doctors’ Policy Research Group The General Medical Council: Fit to Practise? Hilarie Williams, Christoph Lees & Magnus Boyd July 2014 Civitas: Institute for the Study of Civil Society The GMC: Fit to Practise? | 1 Authors Hilarie Williams has a special interest in the social history of medicine and the development of health policy. She graduated in medicine in 1978 and, in 1987, joined the fledgling AIDS unit at the (then) DHSS. Over the next 16 years, Hilarie worked in various health policy areas and she was Senior Medical Adviser to the Department for Education and Employment from 1994 to 2000. She currently combines part time work in medical research with being a carer and she is active in voluntary sector support for people with learning disabilities and autism. Hilarie has studied humanities with the Open University and was awarded an MSc (distinction) in the History and Philosophy of Medicine, Science and Society by Birkbeck College (University of London) in 2011. She continues to enjoy exploring historical perspectives of medicine, the medical profession and health policy. Christoph Lees has taken an interest in medical regulation, healthcare funding and access to high cost treatments. He was a founder member of Doctors for Reform (2002-2012) and the Civitas Doctors’ Policy Research Group (2013), and was Chairman of the Local Negotiating Committee at Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge, 2011-2013. He has informally and formally mentored many doctors who underwent disciplinary and other procedures and assessments. Christoph is a Consultant in Obstetrics & Fetal-Maternal Medicine in London and Visiting Professor at KU Leuven, Belgium. He trained at Guy’s, King’s College and St George’s Hospitals in London and obtained subspecialty accreditation at the Harris Birthright Centre for Fetal Medicine.
  • The Touro College and University System Academic Integrity Policy

    The Touro College and University System Academic Integrity Policy

    THE TOURO COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY SYSTEM ACADEMIC INTEGRITY POLICY June 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 1 STATEMENT ON ACADEMIC INTEGRITY ........................................................................................... 2 VIOLATIONS OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY ........................................................................................... 3 Plagiarism .................................................................................................................................... 4 Intentional Plagiarism ............................................................................................................. 4 Unintentional Plagiarism ......................................................................................................... 5 Cheating on Examinations and Other Class/Fieldwork Assignments ......................................... 5 Research Misconduct and Other Unethical Conduct .................................................................. 6 Fabrication .............................................................................................................................. 6 Falsification ............................................................................................................................. 7 Plagiarism (As Research Misconduct) ..................................................................................... 7 Misleading or Fraudulent