Anti-infective medicine quality: analysis of basic product quality by approval status and country of manufacture
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Some medicines for sale in developing countries are approved by a stringent regulatory authority (SRA) or the World Health Organization (WHO) prequalification program; many of these are global brands. This study ascertains whether medicines approved by SRAs or the WHO perform better in simple quality tests than those that have not been approved by either. Methods: Over the past 4 years, 2652 essential drugs (products to treat malaria, tuberculosis, and bacterial infections) were procured by covert shoppers from eleven African cities and eight cities in a variety of mid-income nations. All samples were assessed using the Global Pharma Health Fund eV Minilab ® protocol to identify whether they were substandard, degraded, or counterfeit. Results: The failure rate among SRA-approved products was 1.01%, among WHO-approved products was 6.80%, and 13.01% among products that were not approved by either. African cities had a greater proportion of SRA- or WHO-approved products (31.50%) than Indian cities (26.57%), but they also experienced a higher failure rate (14.21%) than Indian cities (7.83%). The remainder of cities tested had both the highest proportion of approved products at 34.46% and the lowest failure rate at 2.70%. Products made in Africa had the highest failure rate at 25.77%, followed by Chinese products at 15.74%, Indian products at 3.70%, and European/US products, which failed least often, at 1.70%. Most worrying is that 17.65% of Chinese products approved by the WHO failed. Conclusion: The results strongly indicate that approval by either an SRA or the WHO is correlated with higher medicine quality at a statistically significant level. The comparatively high failure rates among WHO-approved products suggest there may be some weakness in post-marketing surveillance of these products, especially of Chinese-made WHO-approved products. The discrepancy between the failure rate of WHO-approved products from India (2.39%) and China (17.65%) is cause for concern. It is possible that more of the failures originating in China are counterfeit products, but this cannot be ascertained without greater help from the manufacturers themselves. Keywords: stringent regulatory authority, World Health Organization prequalification program, product approval, counterfeit, India, China
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».