Background/Objectives: Real-world colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment is documented across multiple routine hospital data domains, which complicates interpretation of treatment-pattern studies. We characterised medication-documented systemic anticancer treatment patterns in CRC and evaluated the consistency of the routine data sources used to ascertain them. Methods: This retrospective observational study included 1310 encounters from 627 patients with C18—C20 diagnosis codes from 1 March to 30 April 2026. Semicolon-delimited medication entries were normalised to named agents. Patient-level medication-derived treatment patterns were characterised among 54 patients with at least one named antineoplastic documented during the fixed study window, without assuming representativeness of the full CRC-coded cohort; oral prescriptions were analysed separately as complementary evidence. Results: Twenty patients (37.0%) had cytotoxic component(s) only, 20 (37.0%) targeted/immune-checkpoint-inhibitor (ICI) plus cytotoxic components, 12 (22.2%) targeted/ICI components without cytotoxic co-documentation, and 2 (3.7%) other antineoplastic agents only. At the first treatment-documented encounter, 24/54 (44.4%) had at least two named antineoplastic agents co-documented. Thirty-three patients (61.1%) had medication-positive treatment documentation in at least two encounters, and 30/33 (90.9%) had the same documented class set across these encounters. Procedure- and medication-based indicators agreed in 890/891 interpretable encounters (99.89%; Cohen’s kappa 0.9953, 95% CI 0.9839–1.0000). Conclusions: Routine hospital medication data showed heterogeneous medication patterns among CRC-coded patients, frequently with multi-component and repeated documentation. Procedure and medication indicators share a hospital workflow; their near-complete concordance describes internal consistency and cannot exclude joint under-capture or establish clinical accuracy or treatment appropriateness.

Background/Objectives: Medico-legal preparedness is relevant throughout dental education because awareness develops before independent clinical responsibility is assumed. This study examined malpractice awareness, self-perceived preparedness, legal awareness and defensive-practice tendencies among Romanian dental students, residents and dentists. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted between May and June 2026 among 176 participants from the Faculty of Dentistry and its associated professional community in Craiova, Romania. The author-developed questionnaire was completed online (n = 134) or on paper at a professional conference (n = 42). Associations were assessed using non-parametric tests, ordinal logistic regression and robust linear regression. A sensitivity analysis excluded early-year students. Results: Respondents demonstrated moderate legal awareness (mean 3.29 of 5), whilst only 8.0% felt well or very well prepared to manage a malpractice-related situation. In the main model, previous legal training was associated with greater preparedness (adjusted odds ratio 2.52, 95% CI 1.03–6.15), as were resident status and professional clinical experience. In the clinically exposed subgroup (n = 68), practising dentists reported greater preparedness than clinical-year students, whereas familiarity with malpractice and paper-based participation were associated with stronger defensive-practice tendencies. Conclusions: Awareness of medico-legal issues is present across dental education, but perceived preparedness remains limited. The findings support longitudinal, applied medico-legal education and require cautious interpretation because early-year and clinically experienced respondents evaluated partly different aspects of the same phenomenon.

Digital dentistry is revolutionizing the dental industry, and Computer Aided Design / Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAD/CAM) is in the center of this trans

Background/Objectives: Previous obstetric and gynaecological malpractice reviews identify recurring concerns but do not specify a sequence for examining conduct before deviation, causation and attribution. We developed a context-sensitive conceptual framework. Methods: A structured critical narrative review of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection was combined with analysis of Romanian legal and professional sources. The broad searches yielded 1785 database records before deduplication. The team’s legal specialist manually screened the overlapping thematic searches 2A–2D using her subject expertise; duplicates were removed and 223 unique publications were retained. The 347 records reported for thematic search 2A alone are not the input denominator for that corpus. She extracted the information for 40 selected anchor publications, mapping them to eight broad themes. The thirteen-domain Context-Sensitive Liability Assessment Framework for Obstetrics and Gynaecology (CSLAF-OG) was illustrated using three principal Romanian judicial cases and one additional case. Results: The framework orders context, professional standards, autonomy, communication, documentation and organisational conditions before harm, deviation, causation and attribution. Conclusions: CSLAF-OG is a conceptual aid for retrospective analysis, not a validated instrument or legal test. Independent evaluation remains necessary.