Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42612209›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026

Regulatory Readiness for Paper Replacement in Global Pharmaceutical Electronic Labeling: Cross-Sectional Comparative Policy Analysis.

Da Eun Lee, Ji Sun Chun, Mari Kim, In-Wha Kim, Jung Mi Oh

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Da Eun Lee *College of Pharmacy, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0009-0009-7348-3297
Ji Sun Chun *College of Pharmacy, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0009-0004-5896-1645
Mari KimCollege of Pharmacy, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0009-0005-7087-7275
In-Wha KimResearch Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-4976-3343
Jung Mi OhCollege of Pharmacy, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1836-1707

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate and up-to-date medicinal product information is essential for the safe and effective use of medicines. Electronic labeling (e-labeling) has emerged as a potential alternative to paper-based package inserts by enabling timely updates, improving accessibility, and supporting integration with digital health systems. However, regulatory approaches to pharmaceutical e-labeling remain fragmented across jurisdictions.

objectiveThis study examined how e-labeling policies have developed across International Coalition of Medicines Regulatory Authorities (ICMRA) member jurisdictions and explored the conditions associated with policies that position e-labeling as a replacement for paper-based product information.

methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional comparative policy analysis of publicly available national regulatory documents on pharmaceutical e-labeling issued between January 1, 2012, and May 31, 2026. The analysis focused on how regulatory intent, legal authority, implementation mechanisms, and replacement pathways were articulated in official policy documents across jurisdictions. A main corpus of official jurisdictional policy documents was supplemented by a triangulation corpus of international stakeholder documents. Hybrid thematic analysis and content analysis were used to identify and compare policy themes across jurisdictions. A 4-level e-labeling regulatory maturity framework was developed using 3 indicators: implementation status, level of authority, and expansion toward advanced considerations. Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) was then conducted across 19 jurisdictions to identify configurational patterns associated with paper-label replacement.

resultsA total of 81 policy documents from 20 jurisdictions were included in the main analysis, and 27 documents were included in the triangulation corpus. Nine themes were identified across 3 domains: e-labeling scope and implementation strategy, operational infrastructure, and advanced considerations. Most policies addressed target product information, medicine categories, transition approaches, interface mechanisms, and responsible entities. In contrast, structured digital formats, interoperability, and personalized information were less consistently addressed. The maturity assessment showed substantial variation across jurisdictions. Brazil and the Netherlands were classified at the highest maturity level, reflecting implementation with a legal basis and expansion toward advanced functions. The fsQCA identified 1 conservative sufficient configuration associated with paper-label replacement: digital infrastructure readiness, high e-labeling policy maturity, and explicit responsibility of the marketing authorization holder.

conclusionsPharmaceutical e-labeling has moved beyond early policy discussion in many ICMRA member jurisdictions, but regulatory maturity remains uneven. While most jurisdictions enable electronic access to product information, relatively few have established the legal and operational foundations to replace paper labeling. Paper-label replacement was associated with mature regulatory frameworks and clear operational responsibility. By combining a cross-jurisdictional regulatory maturity framework with fsQCA, this study provides a novel comparative approach that extends beyond previous descriptive studies by identifying the conditions associated with paper-label replacement. The proposed framework may offer a structured approach to assessing regulatory readiness and prioritizing the efforts required for effective legal development and implementation.

Indexed as

Drug LabelingCross-Sectional StudiesHumansdigital healthdrug labelingelectronic labelinghealth information systemshealth policyMeSHpharmaceutical preparationspolicy analysisregulatory framework

Identifiers

PMID42612209
PMCPMC13535302

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.