Requirements and Incentives for Implementation of Pharmaceutical Strategic Purchasing in Iranian Health System: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: According to the importance of strategic purchasing as a prerequisite for overall access and universal health coverage, this study was conducted to explore requirements and incentives for implementation of pharmaceutical strategic purchasing in the Iranian health system.METHODS: This was a qualitative study conducted through content analysis with an inductive approach applying a five-stage framework analysis. Data analysis was started right after transcribing each interview applying MAXQDA10. Data was saturated after 32 semi-structured interviews with experts. These key informants were selected purposefully and through snowball sampling.RESULTS: The findings are categorized under three main themes: “Payment Mechanisms to Service Providers”, “Insurance Reimbursement Mechanisms” and “Rules and Regulations”, and eight related subthemes.CONCLUSIONS: According to the importance of incentive interventions in pharmaceutical strategic purchasing, it is necessary to pay close attention to pharmaceutical price, realistic and fair premiums and appropriate contracts with suppliers, along with estimation a reasonable profit margin for pharmaceutical suppliers and the appropriate reimbursement mechanisms as the most significant incentives for increasing access to pharmaceuticals and implementing strategic purchasing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".