On the subject in the title: Prescription requirements and telehealth models — a second dataset Working notes rather than a conclusion.
Posting a small dataset on Prescription requirements and telehealth models. It is mine, it is uncontrolled, and the method is stated so it can be discounted appropriately.
What I would like is not agreement but a second dataset collected by someone with no stake in mine. If one exists I would rather read it than argue for this one.
Second-hand on Prescription requirements and telehealth models, so weight it accordingly — someone whose method I trust told me this and I have not verified it myself.
Adding the measurement that post #2 says would settle it.
Generic or biosimilar entry depends on patent and exclusivity positions that are jurisdiction-specific and are frequently misreported.
Where a claim about legality is made here, the useful follow-up is which instrument it rests on. Most such claims turn out to rest on a forum post.
I had written a reply contradicting post #4 and deleted it. Here is what survived.
Reframing Prescription requirements and telehealth models slightly, because I think the disagreement is about the question rather than the answer. If the question is "does it happen", yes. If it is "how often", nobody here knows.
Adding a note of thanks rather than an opinion. I did not know most of that.
Prescription requirements and telehealth models has a well-known answer and a correct answer, and the interesting work is establishing that they are the same. Nobody has done that here yet.
Post #6 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
An indication approved for one age range does not extend to another, and paediatric extensions are separate decisions with separate evidence.
This has been discussed before and I could not find the thread, so, again.
Coming back to post #8, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
Prescription requirements and telehealth models came up in a thread eighteen months ago and was answered well. I cannot find it, which is itself the problem, so here is the reconstruction.
Worth stating the null on Prescription requirements and telehealth models before we explain it: the observation may be nothing. That possibility deserves a sentence and usually does not get one.
Nothing in this subcategory is legal advice, and the members who work in regulated environments are the most careful to say so.
Old habit: I write down the expected answer before I calculate it.
A note on how Prescription requirements and telehealth models gets discussed rather than on Prescription requirements and telehealth models itself: the confident posts get the replies and the careful ones get ignored, and the careful ones have been right more often.
Narrowing post #11, because the general version has more than one answer.
I read the earlier replies on Prescription requirements and telehealth models twice before writing this, because I had assumed the opposite and wanted to be sure I was disagreeing with what was said rather than what I expected.
Where I part company with post #11, and it is a narrow parting.
If you can confirm or contradict a position for your own region, please date the answer. An undated regional claim is the least useful thing in this category.
Bookmarking this. I will come back when I have something worth adding.
An indication approved for one age range does not extend to another, and paediatric extensions are separate decisions with separate evidence.
I have said this before in a thread nobody could find, so it is worth repeating.
I had written a reply contradicting post #15 and deleted it. Here is what survived.
Counterpoint on Prescription requirements and telehealth models, offered without confidence: the same observation is consistent with a much duller explanation, and nobody has ruled the dull one out.
Confirming post #19 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.
Where a claim about legality is made here, the useful follow-up is which instrument it rests on. Most such claims turn out to rest on a forum post.
The arithmetic in post #20 is right; the assumption feeding it is the part to check.
On Prescription requirements and telehealth models: the maintained page in the documentation commons covers the general case with citations and a review date, which is more reliable than any reply here including this one.
Answering the Prescription requirements and telehealth models question as asked, then the question I think is meant. As asked: yes, with the qualification below. As meant: it depends on how the first measurement was taken.
Nothing in this subcategory is legal advice, and the members who work in regulated environments are the most careful to say so.
Post #22 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it.
I would put moderate confidence on the mainstream reading of Prescription requirements and telehealth models and no more. That is not scepticism for its own sake; it is where the sourcing actually stops.
Worth separating Prescription requirements and telehealth models as a question about the compound from Prescription requirements and telehealth models as a question about the documentation. They get answered by different people and only one of them is answerable here.
Generic or biosimilar entry depends on patent and exclusivity positions that are jurisdiction-specific and are frequently misreported.
I have kept the units in throughout, for the obvious reason.
Taking post #24 at face value and following it one step further.
The confident answers on Prescription requirements and telehealth models and the well-sourced answers are not the same answers, which is the most useful thing I have learned reading this category.
That reframing is the whole thing. The facts I already had.
Before the thread moves on from Prescription requirements and telehealth models — what is the sample size behind the claim? I am not being difficult; I have seen the same figure quoted from an n of four and from an n of four hundred.
On post #26 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
If you can confirm or contradict a position for your own region, please date the answer. An undated regional claim is the least useful thing in this category.