Updated At Apr 18, 2026
DPDP Readiness Checklist for HealthTech Product Teams
A practical, workflow-focused guide for technical evaluators in Indian HealthTech organisations to map DPDP obligations onto real patient, clinician, and ABDM-integrated journeys.
Key takeaways
- DPDP readiness in HealthTech is an architecture and workflow problem, not just a legal checklist; every obligation must map to concrete journeys like registration, consultations, diagnostics, and claims.
- Treat consent, retention, and rights-handling as shared services in your stack (UI + APIs + logs), rather than scattered forms and ad hoc scripts.
- Design for India-specific realities: multilingual consent, ABDM/ABHA flows, offline-to-online data entry, and multi-tenant hospital/clinic relationships.
- Build structured evidence—consent artefacts, audit logs, DPIAs, risk registers—so you can demonstrate due diligence to boards, regulators, hospitals, and partners.
- Consider DPDP-native consent management tooling where you need cross-product, multi-tenant, or ABDM-integrated visibility instead of rebuilding similar capabilities from scratch.
Why DPDP readiness is different for HealthTech product teams
How DPDP applies to digital health data and ecosystems
| Ecosystem actor | Likely DPDP role | Examples in HealthTech | Product design implications |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multi-specialty hospital using a cloud HIS/EHR | Hospital: data fiduciary; HIS/EHR vendor: data processor (for hospital data) | HIS, LIS, RIS, billing, patient app branded to the hospital | Design APIs and contracts so the hospital can configure purposes, notices, and retention; vendor builds strong access controls and audit trails as a processor, and separates its own analytics data from hospital-controlled data. |
| Direct-to-consumer telemedicine app | Platform: data fiduciary for patient and doctor data it collects directly | Teleconsultation, e-prescriptions, chat, remote follow-up, e-pharmacy integration | Implement full DPDP stack: notices, consent, rights-handling, breach response, and retention policies owned by the platform; ensure partner pharmacies, labs, and payment gateways are governed as processors with proper contracts and controls. |
| Diagnostics marketplace or aggregator | Marketplace: data fiduciary; labs: separate data fiduciaries for their own systems; marketplace may also act as processor for certain lab data feeds | Test booking, report delivery, ABHA-linked sharing to patient apps or other providers | Clarify which entity owns which consent flows and notices; ensure ABHA/ABDM data exchanges and report delivery use consent artefacts and that partners receive only the minimum data they need for the patient’s chosen service. |
| Remote monitoring / IoMT platform provider | Often a processor for hospitals/clinics, but may be a fiduciary for its own direct-to-patient offerings and analytics uses of aggregated data | Home monitoring devices, continuous vitals, alerts to care teams, dashboards for clinicians and care coordinators | Implement strict tenancy and access controls; segregate real-time clinical feeds (used for care) from aggregated or de-identified analytics pipelines, with different retention and consent rules where appropriate. |
| ABHA/ABDM-enabled Health Information Provider (HIP) or Health Information User (HIU) | HIP/HIU remains a data fiduciary for digital personal data it processes; consent artefacts in ABDM do not replace DPDP obligations for other processing contexts | Hospitals, clinics, telemedicine apps, and PHRs participating in ABDM exchanges using consent artefacts and federated health record discovery | Ensure your ABDM gateway and consent artefact flows are integrated with your internal consent and data governance layer so that external sharing, internal analytics, and retention behave consistently with DPDP requirements. |
For technical evaluators, a quick way to scope DPDP impact is to list your main digital health patterns and mark where digital personal data is created, transformed, or shared:
- Patient onboarding: self-registration apps, front-desk web apps, call-centre workflows, and offline forms subsequently digitised.
- Clinical workflows: OPD and IPD documentation, teleconsultation chat and video, diagnostic orders/results, prescriptions, discharge summaries.
- ABHA/ABDM flows: creation and linking of ABHA IDs, discovery of federated records, issue and consumption of ABDM consent artefacts, HIP/HIU data exchange.
- Financial flows: insurance pre-authorisations, TPA portals, billing and claims data, payment gateway integrations.
- Engagement and communication: appointment reminders, outreach campaigns, WhatsApp/SMS/email notifications, patient feedback and NPS surveys.
- Analytics and ML: clinical and operational analytics, product usage telemetry, A/B testing, model training datasets, and data-lake copies of EHR data.
Checklist 1: Discover and classify health data across your product stack
DPDP readiness starts with knowing exactly what digital personal data you have, where it flows, and why. Use this checklist to build an actionable data inventory for your HealthTech stack.
-
Map core healthcare journeys before systemsList end-to-end workflows such as new patient registration, follow-up visits, lab/radiology orders, admission-to-discharge, home monitoring, and claims processing. For each, sketch the sequence of steps and actors (patient, receptionist, clinician, lab tech, call-centre agent, insurer, TPA).
-
Catalogue applications, services, and data stores per journeyFor each step, list the UIs, backend services, queues, data stores, and third-party services involved. Include edge components such as mobile apps, kiosk apps, offline sync databases, and integrations with labs, pharmacies, or TPAs.
- Tag whether your system is acting as system of record (authoritative copy) or a cache/replica for that data set.
-
Enumerate entities and attributes that are digital personal dataWithin each system, list the entities and attributes that relate to identifiable individuals: patients, caregivers, doctors, nurses, hospital staff, sales reps, support agents. Include IDs (MRN, ABHA, employee IDs), demographics, contact details, clinical data (diagnoses, vitals, test results), communication logs, usage telemetry, and support tickets.
- Do not forget indirect identifiers such as device IDs, IP addresses, or chat transcripts that may still be linked back to a person through your systems or ABDM identifiers.
-
Attach purposes and legal bases to each data setFor each major data set (for example, OPD encounters, lab results, billing line items, marketing leads, telemetry events), capture the specific purposes for which you process it (care delivery, operations, statutory reporting, product analytics, marketing) and whether you rely on consent, contract, legal obligation, or another lawful ground under DPDP, as advised by your legal team.
- Track which purposes are tied to ABDM consent artefacts versus your own internal consents or other bases.
-
Classify data by sensitivity, retention, and sharing profileCreate a simple schema to classify data sets by relative sensitivity (for example, high for clinical notes and diagnostic images, medium for contact details, lower for aggregated statistics), expected retention horizon, and which external parties receive copies (hospitals, labs, insurers, public health authorities, analytics vendors). Align the schema with DPDP concepts and sectoral guidance from your counsel.
-
Build and maintain a living data inventoryStore this information in a living register (spreadsheet, data catalogue, or governance tool) that engineering, security, and compliance can all access. Integrate updates with your change-management process so that new services or pipelines cannot go live without being added to the inventory.
Many teams find it useful to standardise a small set of DPDP-oriented classification tags:
- Data subject: patient, caregiver, clinician, staff, contractor, visitor, or other.
- Data type: identifiers, contact, financial, clinical, behavioural/usage, communication content, device/technical identifiers, derived/analytics features, de-identified/aggregated data.
- Special categories in practice: children’s data, ABHA/ABDM-linked records, data involving mental health or HIV services (for which sectoral norms may be stricter, even though DPDP does not create a separate legal category of “sensitive personal data”).
- Lifecycle state: active care episode, longitudinal record, archival, backup, test/sandbox, analytical copy.
- Sharing profile: internal-only, intra-group, ABDM exchange, regulator/statutory, contracted processor, external research/partners, public/aggregated output only.
Checklist 2: Design consent and notice across patient and clinician workflows
DPDP requires clear notice and valid consent where consent is the basis for processing. In HealthTech, these surfaces sit inside busy clinical journeys; if you get the UX wrong, clinicians will bypass it and patients will mistrust it.
-
Catalogue all points where you collect or infer consent todaySurvey patient, clinician, and admin journeys to find every point where you capture signatures, checkboxes, verbal consent notes, toggles, or ABDM consent artefacts. Include offline forms that are scanned and uploaded, and consents embedded inside hospital registration packets.
- Mark each with the purposes it covers (e.g., care delivery, data sharing with other providers, marketing, research, product improvement).
-
Standardise consent and notice content per purpose, not per screen or formWork with legal/compliance to define canonical wording for each purpose bundle (for example, treatment and operations, ABDM sharing, marketing communication, de-identified analytics). Then surface these consistently across all channels: mobile apps, web portals, clinic kiosks, printed forms, and call-centre scripts.
- Ensure notices explain what data is collected, for which purposes, who it may be shared with, retention expectations, and how to withdraw consent or exercise rights under DPDP, in plain language appropriate for your patient base.
-
Separate consent for core care from consent for secondary uses and marketingDesign your flows so that a patient can receive necessary care even if they decline optional uses such as marketing or certain analytics, unless your legal basis or regulatory obligations require otherwise. Technically, this means separate flags or artefacts for different purposes, not a single opaque “I agree” checkbox for everything.
-
Implement consent as an internal service with APIs and event streamsExpose a consent service that can be called from front-end apps, partner systems, and ABDM gateway components to create, fetch, and revoke consent records. Emit events when consent status changes so that downstream services (notifications, analytics, third-party integrations) can react in near real time.
- Ensure that service responses are easy for clinicians to understand in context (e.g., a banner that explains why a report cannot be shared because consent is missing).
-
Design for multilingual, low-bandwidth, and assisted workflows in IndiaOffer notices and consent options in relevant local languages, with large tap targets, readable fonts, and flows that work on low-end Android devices. For clinic-based care, support assisted consent capture by staff while still showing the notice to the patient or caregiver and capturing evidence of that display and acknowledgement where practical.
-
Ensure consent withdrawal and expiry are technically enforceable, not just policy textProvide easy mechanisms for patients to withdraw consent for optional purposes (for example, a toggle in the app, a link in emails, or a call-centre process), and design your services so that withdrawal triggers changes in actual behaviour: stop marketing, stop sharing with certain partners, and adjust analytics where feasible.
- Model expiry windows (for example, consent valid until the end of an episode of care or for a defined number of days) and automatically enforce them in your data flows.
Checklist 3: Operationalising data principal rights in healthcare systems
For HealthTech products, operationalising these rights means designing both UX flows and internal processes that respect clinical and medico-legal realities:
- Access: Provide patients with a consolidated view of their records across encounters and facilities where feasible, including reports, prescriptions, and visit summaries. For clinicians and staff, define role-based access to only what they need for care or operations.
- Correction: Allow patients to request correction of demographics and obvious errors (e.g., wrong address, phone number). For clinical content, design workflows where corrections are tracked as amendments or addenda rather than overwriting original entries, to preserve clinical and legal auditability.
- Erasure: Implement layered responses to erasure requests (e.g., delete marketing profiles and optional analytics copies; restrict access or further use of clinical records while retaining them where required by law or medical standards). Clearly document and communicate what you can and cannot erase and why, based on counsel’s guidance.
- Grievance redressal: Provide clear, in-product routes to raise privacy concerns (for example, a “data and privacy” help centre category, email, and in-app form) and build SLA-backed internal workflows to triage, investigate, and respond within DPDP timelines where applicable.
- Nomination: Where DPDP requires or your organisation chooses to support nomination (e.g., allowing a trusted person to act on behalf of a patient), integrate this with existing healthcare proxies or consent-to-treat flows, and ensure nomination decisions are visible to clinicians who rely on them.
| DPDP right | Example request in HealthTech context | Preferred system behaviour | Healthcare-specific edge cases |
|---|---|---|---|
| Access | "Send me all my OPD visit notes, prescriptions, and lab reports for the last 3 years." | Provide downloadable/exportable records via secure portal or app; log the request, response time, and data shared for compliance evidence. | Older records may be on legacy systems or physical files; design bridging workflows and explain any limitations transparently to the patient. |
| Correction | "My date of birth and phone number are wrong in your system." | Support self-service correction for demographics with verification (OTP, documents) and maintain a log of prior values for forensic/audit purposes. | For clinical facts the patient disagrees with (e.g., a diagnosis), route requests to clinical governance workflows; typically record an addendum rather than modifying historical notes outright. |
| Erasure (where applicable) | "Delete all my information from your telemedicine app." | Delete or irreversibly de-identify data that is not required for legal, contractual, or medico-legal reasons (e.g., marketing profiles, optional analytics copies), and mark remaining records as restricted for only mandated purposes. | Where sectoral rules require retaining medical records for defined periods, implement technical safeguards such as role-based restrictions and policy tags noting that the data cannot be used beyond certain purposes even if not physically deleted. |
| Grievance redressal and nomination | "I think my data has been misused" or "I want my spouse to manage my records." | Provide a clear contact point and workflow to investigate and respond to grievances, and structured flows to register and update nominations that can be seen wherever decisions depend on them (e.g., release of reports, sharing records under ABDM). | Handle conflicts between family members carefully with clinical and legal input; your product should make it easy to consult logs of past consents and nominations for such reviews. |
Checklist 4: Record retention, erasure, and evidence for health data
An effective retention and erasure design for HealthTech products should cover at least the following elements:
- Retention matrix: Define, with legal and clinical input, retention periods and permitted purposes for each major data category (e.g., outpatient records, inpatient records, imaging, diagnostics, billing, audit logs, backups, analytics datasets). Capture jurisdictional differences if you serve multiple states or countries.
- Policy-as-data: Model retention and purpose rules in configuration (for example, policy tables or governance service), not hard-coded logic, so you can adapt when DPDP guidance or sectoral rules evolve without rewriting core systems.
- Erase and de-identify flows: Implement jobs and workflows to delete, anonymise, or pseudonymise data on schedule and in response to erasure requests where applicable. Ensure they cover primary stores, caches, search indices, data lakes, and analytics pipelines, not just the main database.
- Backups and DR: Decide how to handle retention in backups; in many cases, practical controls include shorter backup retention windows and processes to restore and re-run erasure jobs if specific backups must be loaded for forensic reasons.
- Evidence of decisions: Log when and why data was retained or erased (for example, “retained for 10 years due to X regulation” or “analytics dataset anonymised on YYYY-MM-DD”), and make these logs queryable for audits, grievances, and board reporting.
Checklist 5: Security controls, breach response, and vendor governance
For HealthTech products, security and vendor governance should be treated as first-class product capabilities, not just IT policy. At minimum, your architecture should support:
- Strong identity and access management: unique accounts; MFA for privileged users; role- and attribute-based access control for clinicians, administrators, and support staff; limited use of shared or generic accounts in clinical areas with appropriate compensating controls and audit logs.
- Encryption in transit and at rest: TLS for all external and internal service communications; encryption of databases, file stores, and backups holding personal or health data; key management procedures aligned with your organisation’s policies and industry expectations.
- Environment segregation and data isolation: separate dev/test/stage/prod environments; scrubbed or synthetic data in non-production; strong tenant isolation for multi-tenant hospital or clinic deployments to avoid cross-customer data leakage.
- Comprehensive logging and monitoring: security-relevant events (logins, role changes, access to sensitive records, exports, configuration changes), application audit trails (who accessed or modified which record and when), and infrastructure telemetry feeding into SIEM/alerting pipelines with on-call rotations.
- Structured incident and breach response: runbooks for detecting, triaging, containing, and eradicating incidents; clear roles across engineering, security, legal, communications, and customer success; pre-drafted notification templates tailored to DPDP and your contractual commitments where applicable.
- Vendor and sub-processor governance: standard security and DPDP clauses in contracts; due-diligence questionnaires; minimum security baselines; and mechanisms to track and approve sub-processors over time, especially for cloud, communications, analytics, and consent tooling providers.
| Control area | Baseline expectation for DPDP readiness | HealthTech-specific nuance | What to verify in your stack or vendor |
|---|---|---|---|
| Access control & IAM | Least-privilege access, strong auth, periodic access reviews, clear joiner/mover/leaver processes for staff and contractors. | Clinicians often need rapid access under pressure; design workflows that are secure yet minimise friction, and handle emergency access (“break glass”) scenarios with strong logging and review. | Review RBAC/ABAC models, admin console capabilities, emergency access workflows, and support for SSO with hospital IdPs where needed. |
| Data isolation & tenancy model | Logical or physical separation of customer data; strong controls to prevent cross-tenant access for support and operations staff; clear deletion on contract termination where appropriate. | A single SaaS may serve dozens of hospitals and thousands of clinics; misconfigured tenancy is a high-impact risk because records may include detailed clinical histories and identifiers like ABHA IDs. | Ask for a high-level architecture of tenancy, data segregation mechanisms, and how support tooling accesses tenant data (e.g., just-in-time scoped access vs long-lived super-admin accounts). |
| Logging, audit trails, and evidence generation | Comprehensive, tamper-evident logs of access, changes, exports, and consent decisions, retained for appropriate periods and protected from unauthorised modification. | Audit trails are critical not just for DPDP but also for clinical quality reviews, medico-legal defence, and ABDM compliance, where you may need to prove how, when, and under whose consent a record was shared. | Verify that the product can produce patient-level and system-level audit reports, including consent artefacts, policy versions, and event history, without ad hoc scripting. |
| Vendor & sub-processor management | Contracts that clearly define DPDP roles, security expectations, breach-notification obligations, and restrictions on sub-processing; maintained inventory of all processors and sub-processors with data flow descriptions. | HealthTech stacks often depend on messaging gateways, cloud providers, analytics platforms, consent tooling, and ABDM gateway vendors; weaknesses in any one can lead to systemic risk for patient trust. | Review processor lists, security whitepapers, and sample DPDP addendum language; ensure there are clear processes to onboard or offboard vendors and track where patient data flows. |
Building a DPDP readiness roadmap for HealthTech product teams
To move from checklist to execution, structure DPDP readiness as a phased roadmap that balances regulatory urgency with product realities.
-
Discovery and scoping with cross-functional stakeholdersConvene product, architecture, security, legal/compliance, and clinical leadership to agree on objectives, risk appetite, and scope. Use Checklists 1–5 to drive structured conversations and capture current-state gaps in data inventory, consent, rights, retention, security, and vendor governance.
-
Current-state mapping and risk assessment per product line or tenant segmentFor each major product (EHR, telemedicine platform, diagnostics, ABHA-linked PHR), document DPDP-relevant capabilities, known gaps, and key risks (e.g., untracked copies of data in data lakes, lack of consent logs, incomplete audit trails, weak vendor contracts). Prioritise gaps by impact on patient trust and regulatory exposure.
-
Target-state design: architecture and operating model decisionsDefine your target DPDP architecture: central vs federated consent layer, data catalogues and lineage, rights and retention services, logging and evidence stores, and how they integrate with ABDM gateways and partner systems. Decide where to build vs buy, especially for cross-cutting capabilities like consent management, policy-as-code, and DPDP evidence generation.
- Agree on an operating model: who owns policies, who owns implementation, and how changes are reviewed and rolled out across tenants and regions.
-
Implementation planning and backlog decomposition per teamTranslate architectural decisions into concrete backlog items: API changes for consent and rights, UI flows, database migrations for retention tags, logging enhancements, vendor contract updates, and playbooks for incident response. Sequence work so that enablers (e.g., central consent and policy services) land before downstream changes that depend on them.
-
Rollout, training, and change management across hospitals and partnersPilot new DPDP-aligned flows in a limited set of hospitals or geographies, gathering feedback from clinicians, operations, and patients. Provide training and job aids explaining why consent and rights flows matter and how to handle exceptions without blocking care.
- Align contract and SLA updates with rollout so that expectations with hospitals, labs, and other partners match what your product actually does.
-
Monitoring, audits, and continuous improvement under DPDP and ABDMSet up KPIs and dashboards for DPDP readiness: consent coverage, rights request SLAs, retention job success, security incident metrics, and vendor compliance status. Schedule periodic internal audits and board reporting, and be ready to adapt when DPDP or ABDM guidance evolves.
Troubleshooting DPDP readiness issues in HealthTech products
Common implementation issues and pragmatic ways to unblock them:
- Issue: Data inventory stalls because teams cannot agree on “systems of record”. Fix: Start with a pragmatic view—define primary write locations per entity, then mark downstream copies. Accept that some legacy ambiguity will exist and prioritise high-risk data sets (clinical data, ABHA-linked records, analytics lakes) first.
- Issue: Clinicians feel consent screens slow down care and bypass them in emergencies. Fix: Co-design flows with clinical champions; minimise clicks; use pre-visit or waiting-room flows for optional consents; implement well-governed “break glass” modes with strong audit logging instead of informal workarounds.
- Issue: Erasure requests conflict with local medical record retention rules or hospital policy. Fix: Implement layered erasure patterns—immediate deletion for optional uses (marketing, certain analytics), restriction for mandatory records—and document these patterns in your privacy notices and DPIAs, validated by legal and clinical leadership.
- Issue: ABDM integrations bypass your internal consent service, leading to inconsistent behaviour. Fix: Treat the ABDM gateway as a first-class integration to your consent and governance layer: always record artefact-based approvals centrally and ensure internal services check that layer, not the gateway directly, when deciding what to do.
- Issue: You cannot produce end-to-end evidence (who saw what, under which consent) for a patient-level dispute. Fix: Prioritise building or integrating an audit trail capability that unifies consent records, access logs, and data-sharing events. Backfill as much as feasible for recent data, then enforce new standards prospectively.
- Issue: Vendor and sub-processor landscape is opaque, especially for messaging, analytics, and cloud services used by teams independently. Fix: Require registration of all vendors that handle personal data in a central register; block new vendor use in production until DPDP and security checks are complete; progressively migrate ad hoc tools to governed, approved options.
Common mistakes HealthTech teams make with DPDP
Watch out for these patterns that often derail DPDP programmes in digital health organisations:
- Treating DPDP as a one-time documentation task instead of evolving data and consent architecture built into your engineering backlog and release processes.
- Equating “we have a privacy policy and a checkbox” with meaningful consent governance, without standardised purpose definitions, logs, or revocation flows that actually change downstream behaviour.
- Ignoring non-patient personal data—such as clinicians, staff, call-centre agents, and sales reps—under the assumption that only patient data is in scope for DPDP and ABDM-related safeguards.
- Relying entirely on ABDM consent artefacts and assuming they automatically cover all other uses of data within your products, including analytics, marketing, and third-party integrations unrelated to ABDM exchanges.
- Over-collecting data “just in case we need it later” and then struggling to justify purposes, retention, and breach impact when something goes wrong.
- Deferring log and evidence design until the end, making it expensive or impossible to reconstruct who accessed which records under which consent basis when facing audits or grievances.
Common questions about DPDP readiness in HealthTech products
FAQs
ABDM focuses on secure, consent-driven exchange of health records between HIPs, HIUs, and other participants. DPDP is broader: it governs all digital personal data processing, including within your own systems and in non-ABDM contexts. If your product uses ABHA IDs and ABDM consent artefacts, you still need DPDP-aligned notices, rights handling, retention, and security for all other processing of the same individuals’ data. Practically, this means integrating your ABDM gateway and artefact management into a wider consent and data governance layer rather than treating it as a separate silo.[5]
Designation as a significant data fiduciary depends on factors notified by the government, such as volume and sensitivity of data processed, risk of harm to data principals, and impact on national interests. Large-scale HealthTech platforms—especially those handling high volumes of longitudinal health records, children’s data, or critical public infrastructure—may be candidates.[2]
If you suspect your organisation might fall into this category, include potential additional obligations such as DPIAs, independent audits, and enhanced record-keeping in your roadmap discussions and seek specific advice from counsel.
Your legal and clinical teams need to determine where sectoral regulations or professional standards require retaining medical records for defined periods, and where DPDP-based erasure can apply fully or partially. As a product team, assume there will be situations where you cannot technically delete everything immediately.
Design for layered responses: full deletion for optional or ancillary processing (such as marketing), pseudonymisation or strict access restriction for mandated records, and clear explanations in your privacy notices and response templates about what was done and why.
If you operate a small number of products with limited integrations, building basic consent and rights flows in-house may be manageable. However, as you scale across multiple products, hospitals, and ecosystems like ABDM, maintaining consistent consent models, logs, language packs, analytics, and evidence tooling becomes complex.
In such scenarios, evaluating specialised platforms like Digital Anumati—which provide DPDP-native consent management, real-time tracking, APIs/SDKs, multi-language support, and audit reporting—can reduce implementation risk and ongoing maintenance effort compared with bespoke builds, provided they align with your architecture and regulatory strategy.[1]
Beyond policies, you need concrete artefacts: up-to-date data inventories and data flow diagrams; documented retention schedules; consent templates and logs; rights-request registers and SLA metrics; security policies and incident runbooks; vendor and sub-processor registers; and periodic internal audit or DPIA reports where applicable.
From a product perspective, design exports and dashboards that can generate these artefacts without manual data stitching—this is often a key differentiator when hospitals and enterprises evaluate HealthTech vendors.
Anchor your prioritisation on risk and leverage. Start with high-risk, high-leverage building blocks: data inventory, consent and rights services, logging and audit trails, and key security controls. These enable many downstream compliance and product improvements.
Then layer in UX refinements, advanced retention automation, and partner governance improvements. Communicate clearly to stakeholders how each DPDP initiative reduces legal, operational, or reputational risk—or enables new trusted data-sharing use cases.
Sources
- Digital Anumati DPDP Act Compliant Consent Management - Digital Anumati
- The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (Act No. 22 of 2023) - Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India
- Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025 - Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India
- Summary The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 - Data Security Council of India (DSCI)
- About ABDM Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission - National Health Authority, Government of India
- Adoption, digital health literacy, and patient satisfaction of Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission - BMC Health Services Research (Springer Nature)