American Journal of Law & Medicine最新文献

{"title":"A Critic on Legal, Ethical, and Regulatory Issues of Off-Label Medicines Shepardizing Intellectual Property Law towards Pharmacoeconomics: A Discussion of Pfizer’s Norvasc Patent Case","authors":"Zharama M. Llarena","doi":"10.47672/ajl.1619","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47672/ajl.1619","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Pharmacoeconomics is a pharmacy discipline designed to tackle issues on clinical, ethical, and safety factors leading to advocacy of healthcare corporate governance in fulfillment of the pillars of sustainable development. Thus, it is necessary to discuss illegal diversions of Intellectual Property of drug patents as these legal problems serve as impediments to Pharmacoeconomics. This paper aims to elucidate the advantages of Off-label medicines in favor of clinical, ethical, and safety aspects of Pharmacoeconomics towards patient safety and treatment for welfare.
 Methodologies: Quantitative measurement is crucial for validation of drug quality products. It is used for comparison of both legal and illegal diversions of healthcare corporate governance. Patent Law and its policy options are tools to measure the violations of the perpetrator under Intellectual Property Law. Meanwhile, the British National Formulary follows the Human Medicines of 2012 and communicate with FDA for the implementation of off-label medicines as policy for clinical practice under legal removal of patent protection for medical research and practice. This study follows a diagnostic design as a research method based on ethical, regulatory, and legal presentations to characterize problems involved in drug management system towards efficiency of evidence-based medicine practice utilizing theories, models, and frameworks towards financial intelligence. 
 Findings: The elucidation of Kano Model Framework exhibits the aberration and compliance of patent drugs towards compliance of healthcare corporate governance. Based on exhibition of intellectual property law, it can be extended to fulfill the goals of sustainable development of monetary success and hence, the human society can be reflected as their success to their financial intelligence as their inventorship is declared as non-obviousness to public welfare and safety. Moreover, the moral standard of ethical decision-making illustrated the importance of opting to off-label medicines emphasizing cost-efficiency goals of Pharmacoeconomics in drug therapy. Hence, the Shariah Jurisprudence Method for Pharmacoeconomics is the modelling of Clinical Pharmacy Practice towards Healthcare Corporate Governance in fulfillment of business ethics as public welfare and safety of human society.
 Recommendation: Kano Model Framework is an integrated tool of measuring the success of healthcare corporate governance. With the elucidation aids of modelling the importance of Pharmacoeconomics, it is recommended to develop ways of making artificial intelligence as a sole success, profit, benefit, and contribution to clinical pharmacy practice, starting from its drug development up to its intended purpose of human drug treatment in healthcare setting, in relation to its accompanied FDA regulating bodies, as British National Formulary team compliance of maintaining the crucial functions of observing and monitoring document for","PeriodicalId":7680,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135616269","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Legal Issues of Cardiovasc as Quality Drug Patented Product Based on Pharmaceutical Formulations Using Spectrophotometric Validation for Healthcare Corporate Governance","authors":"Zharama Llarena","doi":"10.47672/ajl.1609","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47672/ajl.1609","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Cardiovasc is the patented product name of Amlodipine besylate. Its intended design is aimed for vasodilatory action primarily used in treating stable and variant angina, and hypertension. This study aims to validate the linearity of absorbance of the reference standard with Cardiovasc drug concentration. Moreover, the drug concentration elucidation from the samples aims to quantitate the correlation of the marketed patented drug for commercial use as possible source of environmental pollutants known as greenhouse gases. 
 Methodology: Ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy is used to measure the absorbance of the drug samples, Amlodipine besylate reference standard and Cardiovasc, for validation of linearity with drug concentration using the electron excitement from HOMO to LUMO of anti-bonding energy levels for catalytic analysis of drug concentration. Interaction with uncertainties, risks, and capabilities is a tool for decision making of health effects and economic impacts to sustainable development.
 Findings: The results from Ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy shows that minimal drug concentration exposed as discharge to the environment will not exhibit any linear correlation as significant contributor of environmental pollutants. The commercial drug, Cardiovasc, follows the second range of Amlodipine besylate reference standard, hence, Cardiovasc effluents play a critical role to the quality design of marketed drug in terms of medical research methods as this procedure is done as exclusion to the acquired drug patentability intended to exercise their healthcare corporate governance as fulfillment of monetary goals in business ethics of sustainable development.
 Recommendations: This legal validation highlights the significance of linear correlation of patented drug to environmental effects as social responsibility of corporate healthcare governance. Hence, the International Trade Law enables the marketed drug product to perform its intended action as well as to advocate sustainable development goals as “commercial” in nature. As the European Patent Commission clearly states that medical research methods are excluded from the patentability coverage of drug product, this paper strongly recommends innovation of tools, engineering on eradicating greenhouse gases as sources of environmental pollutants that play a crucial factor to climate change.","PeriodicalId":7680,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135252414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Shepard’s Validation of Antitrust Relief Framework on Patent Infringement of Novartis’ Cancer Drug Using Genomic Architectures of Legal Literature Based on UK Intellectual Property Law","authors":"Z. Llarena","doi":"10.47672/ajl.1566","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47672/ajl.1566","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Comparative law is designed for alignment of constitutional law with other countries advocating public welfare and safety. The United States has an Intellectual Property provision under U.S. Fair Clause using their constitution as pre-emptive doctrine. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the applicability of UK Intellectual Property Law based on their complexed policies on Artificial Intelligence. Hence, it leads to problem statements questioning: (1) the eligibility of matters of facts did not meet UK IP Law; (2) the standard for evidence towards invention using Artificial Intelligence does not conform with UK IP Law; (3) Liability in AI patent infringement is not subsistent in UK IP Law; and (4) AI’s compliance is not subject for responsibility under creativity and non-obviousness criteria. \u0000Methodology: The Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement promotes the public welfare and safety under constitutional laws. India, as a member, is obliged to comply with the standard of evidence in patentability under World Trade Organization (WTO). The study employs comparative contextual assessment using Novartis’ case as trial proceedings for disclosing theoretical framework vital to socio-legal integration of WTO principles. \u0000Findings: The World Trade Organization is a committee responsible to advocate business law. Invention for marketability of patent product has its own complexed policy to comply for acceptance of an Intellectual Property creation. Constitutional law is designed to be made comparable with other countries promoting monetary success of their nation exhibiting economic progress in industrial and technological advancements. Hence, authorless works marking artificial intelligence towards public health and safety must be done in lack of any dedication to human connections resulting to immersion of their “new” product as a work of an art making non-obviousness skills to people as part of common logic and interests, hence, a product of convenience. \u0000Recommendations: WTO is an intergovernmental task force important to implement constitutional laws comparable to other countries resulting to theory integration of socio-legal aspects based on trade-related principles. Hence, the advocacy of business ethics is a highly acknowledged means of making the lives of people to be technologically advanced with convenience, thus, inventions should be made affordable for public access.","PeriodicalId":7680,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87397095","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Relevance of the International Criminal Court and Its Possible Deterrent Effects of International Crimes","authors":"A. Adamu","doi":"10.47672/ajl.1554","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47672/ajl.1554","url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The ICC was established for the primary purpose of ensuring that the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole do not go unpunished and to contribute to the prevention of such crimes. Thus, this paper seeks to determine the possible deterrent effects of international crimes by the ICC through its investigations, prosecutions, sanctions and other activities. \u0000Methodology: The study adopted the doctrinal research method. Both primary and secondary sources like Statute, Case Law, textbooks, journals and internet are used. \u0000Finding: Finding reveals that the Court has not been effective in deterring and preventing international criminality due to lack of cooperation from States and lack of universal jurisdiction. \u0000Recommendation:  In order for the Court to effectively deter the commission of international crimes, there is need to alleviate the factors hindering the proper discharge of the Court’s functions like lack of cooperation from states, a standing police force and universal jurisdiction.","PeriodicalId":7680,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","volume":"209 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77988258","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Potential Effects of <i>Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health</i> on Civil Commitment Law.","authors":"Timothy S Hall","doi":"10.1017/amj.2023.37","DOIUrl":"10.1017/amj.2023.37","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Since the publication of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health <i>in June of 2022, much attention has been paid to the direct effects of that decision on reproductive health care for pregnant or potentially pregnant individuals; and to the potential effects of the Court's approach in</i> Dobbs <i>to other established precedent related to privacy and autonomy, such as rights to contraception and marriage equality. This Article will explore another potential negative consequence of</i> Dobbs; its potential effect on the constitutional parameters of the law of civil commitment and involuntary medication of the mentally ill.The foundational Supreme Court case establishing the parameters of the State's right to involuntarily commit an individual to a mental institution was decided only two years after Roe v. Wade<i>. In 1975, the Supreme Court in</i> O'Connor v Donaldson held that an individual has a liberty interest in \"prefer[ring] one's home to the comforts of an institution,\" and that a State could not, \"without more,\" confine a non-dangerous individual. The two-prong test of requiring a showing of both mental illness and dangerousness to one's self or to others has remained the cornerstone of civil commitment law ever since.The language and analysis of O'Connor <i>is similar to that of</i> Roe<i>, the abortion rights case overturned by</i> Dobbs<i>. In particular, the grounding of the right to avoid civil commitment in the individual liberty and privacy interests are common themes in the two cases. The current Court, in its decision in</i> Dobbs<i>, has cast substantial doubt on the continued vitality of that analysis; and one can easily imagine a reconceptualization of</i> O'Connor <i>along the lines of</i> Dobbs <i>that substantially alters the requirements for civil commitment. In particular, the reliance in</i> Dobbs and other recent Supreme Court opinions on historical precedent as a linchpin of originalist analysis could lead the Court to search for justifications in colonial or 19^th-century mental health practices, time periods which predate modern psychiatric science.This Article will explore the parallels in approach between Roe <i>and</i> O'Connor<i>, and will suggest ways in which the post-</i>Dobbs <i>Supreme Court majority might disrupt the civil commitment status quo, including potential expansion of civil commitment or other detention of pregnant individuals for the protection of the fetus; and possible relaxation of the dangerousness requirement for civil commitment articulated in</i> O'Connor.</p>","PeriodicalId":7680,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","volume":"49 2-3","pages":"359-373"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139721226","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Causes of Minor Suicide: How the Restatement Approach to Foreseeability & Scope of Liability Fails to Act as a Deterrent.","authors":"John W Toomey","doi":"10.1017/amj.2023.40","DOIUrl":"10.1017/amj.2023.40","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Suicide is one of the most common causes of death among individuals younger than eighteen years old. While psychological and social sciences continue to study the causes of the increasing prevalence of suicide in children and teens, the law largely continues to treat suicide as an isolated event. This Note tracks the historical treatment of suicide both under tort and criminal law, supporting the shift away from the traditional view of suicide towards one that more closely aligns with the growing understanding of the many factors that can contribute to a minor's suicide. Ultimately, this Note argues that many minor suicides should be treated as foreseeable, allowing actions in tort.</p>","PeriodicalId":7680,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","volume":"49 2-3","pages":"396-413"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139721229","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Right to Construct Yourself and Your Identity: The Current Human Rights Law Framework Falls Short in Practice in the Face of Illegitimate Interference to the Mind.","authors":"Emine Ozge Yildirim-Vranckaert","doi":"10.1017/amj.2023.31","DOIUrl":"10.1017/amj.2023.31","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Propaganda and manipulation have long been employed to influence and shape individuals' thoughts and identities. In the advent of the digital era, these techniques have become more sophisticated and invasive, and are utilized to further various causes. This article investigates the extent to which international human rights law affords protection against manipulation techniques such as microtargeting and behavioral reading, which can negatively impact individuals' mental health and autonomy by threatening their right to construct their own identity. The right to freedom of thought in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 18), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 18), and the European Convention on Human Rights (Article 9) offers absolute protection to individuals' inner selves and covers the protection against manipulation on paper. However, in practice, the right has not received much attention and has not reached its full potential due to its abstract and ambiguous nature. This Article analyzes the preparatory works of these human rights law instruments, with a particular focus on the right to freedom of thought, to clarify its origins and the intention behind its creation. The Article contends that the historical origins of the right do not provide sufficient answers to the current issue and contribute to the ineffective application of the right against emerging manipulative practices. The Article also proposes potential ways to clarify and strengthen the legal framework related to the right to freedom of thought.</p>","PeriodicalId":7680,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","volume":"49 2-3","pages":"267-285"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139721231","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"\"The Timeless Explosion of Fantasy's Dream\": How State Courts Have Ignored the Supreme Court's Decision in <i>Panetti v. Quarterman</i>.","authors":"Michael L Perlin, Talia Roitberg Harmon, Maren Geiger","doi":"10.1017/amj.2023.28","DOIUrl":"10.1017/amj.2023.28","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Multiple states have enacted statutes to govern procedures when a state seeks to execute a person who may be incompetent to understand why s/he is being so punished, an area of the law that has always been riddled with confusion. The Supreme Court, in <i>Panetti v. Quarterman</i>, sought to clarify matters, ruling that a mentally ill defendant had a constitutional right to make a showing that his mental illness \"obstruct[ed] a rational understanding of the State's reason for his execution.\"However, the first empirical studies of how <i>Panetti</i> has been interpreted in federal courts painted a dismal picture. Only a handful of defendants have ever been successful in federal courts in seeking to enforce the <i>Panetti</i> ruling, and the authors of this abstract have characterized the relief ostensibly offered by that case as nothing more than an \"illusion\" or a \"mirage\" in a federal context. The issues of believability of experts, allegations of malingering, and \"synthetic competency\" dominate these decisions.In this paper, we seek to expand this inquiry to determine (1) how defendants in state courts seeking to assert <i>Panetti</i> claims have fared, and (2) the extent to which state statutes have made any meaningful difference in the way such cases have been decided. We also investigate the significance of the fact that the caselaw in this area has totally ignored the teachings of the school of legal thought known as therapeutic jurisprudence and offer some conclusions and recommendations (based on therapeutic jurisprudence principles) that, if implemented, can (at least partially) ameliorate this situation.</p>","PeriodicalId":7680,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","volume":"49 2-3","pages":"205-233"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139721272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reshaping Insanity in Pakistani Law: The Case of Safia Bano.","authors":"Muhammad Ahmad Munir, Brian Wright","doi":"10.1017/amj.2023.33","DOIUrl":"10.1017/amj.2023.33","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This Article analyzes the 2021 judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Mst. Safia Bano v. Home Department, Government of Punjab. The case has garnered significant local and international attention due to the Court's ruling that a death sentence may not be carried out on a defendant who has a mental illness. Setting the case against the backdrop of Pakistan's Islamic and colonial contexts, this article argues that the Supreme Court has reshaped the insanity defense in Pakistani law by placing the determination of a defendant's mental state mainly in the hands of medical professionals. However, the Court's reliance on medical professionals and the subsequent downplaying of the \"moral capacity\" element of the insanity defense-a determination of law made by courts-has created an obstacle for courts to punish offenders more stringently in future cases due to the popular belief that mental health professionals are ill-equipped to answer broader questions of justice for victims and society. The article recommends that this issue can be remedied by establishing an objective legal test for insanity that considers Islamic law, Pakistani precedent, and advances in medical science.</p>","PeriodicalId":7680,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","volume":"49 2-3","pages":"301-313"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139721227","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"What Does \"Least Restrictive\" or \"Less Restrictive\" Mean in Mental Health Law? Contradictions and Confusion in the Case of Queensland, Australia.","authors":"Julia Duffy, Sam Boyle, Katrine Del Villar","doi":"10.1017/amj.2023.32","DOIUrl":"10.1017/amj.2023.32","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Most legal systems in the West allow for involuntary treatment of mental illness, usually on the basis that without such treatment the person would be a danger to themselves or others. While historically the mental health law jurisdiction has been a protective one, it has become increasingly influenced by civil rights and international human rights law, which privilege the value of autonomy and the right to personal liberty.In this regard, an important principle that has developed is that decisions about treatment for mental illness must be the \"least restrictive alternative\" available. This may mean, for example, that a person is supported to make a decision on treatment for their mental illness, according to evolving practices of \"supported decision-making,\" so that their legal capacity is still recognized. If involuntary treatment is required, the \"least restrictive\" approach demands that the liberty and integrity of the person be respected to the greatest extent possible.The Mental Health Act 2016 (Qld) (\"MHAQ\") prescribes that decision-making on non-consensual treatment should preferably be done according to what it calls the \"less restrictive way.\" However, the \"less restrictive way\" is defined as decision-making by patients under advance directives, and also by substitute decision-makers, including by attorneys or guardians not appointed by the patient, usually a family member. The MHAQ states that these arrangements are distinguished from and prioritized over what it calls \"involuntary treatment and care,\" where the decision for non-consensual treatment is made by the treating team.However, we argue that these arrangements are not in fact \"less restrictive\" of the person's autonomy, but are less accountable forms of decision-making. Decision-making by treating teams under involuntary treatment provisions is subject to higher levels of transparency and accountability. In Australian states these decisions are reviewed regularly by a specially constituted, independent mental health tribunal. By contrast, treatment decisions made under the \"less restrictive way\" are not even defined as constituting involuntary treatment, and are outside the scope of the tribunal's review.In the case of decision-making by advance directive, we acknowledge that this is widely considered to be \"less restrictive\" of a person's right to legal capacity and autonomy. However, in these cases, the patient may actually be refusing treatment at the time the advance directive is relied upon. This raises serious questions as to whether such \"voluntary\" admissions and treatment should not be subject to the same oversight and accountability as involuntary ones. Patients have a right to less restrictive forms of decision-making, but when deprived of their liberty, they also have a right to adequate safeguards established by law.The term \"less restrictive\" in the MHAQ is largely misplaced and misleading. In the case of advance directives, it deflects attention from the ","PeriodicalId":7680,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","volume":"49 2-3","pages":"286-300"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139721232","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}