MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080884038 · doi:10.1111/jphs.12379

Why healthcare market needs government intervention to improve access to essential medicines and healthcare efficiency: a scoping review from pharmaceutical price regulation perspective

2020· review· en· W3080884038 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mende Mensa Sorato, Majid Davari, Akbar Abdollahi Asl, Fatemeh Soleymani, Abbas Kebriaeezadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmaceutical Health Services Research · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicPharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEssential medicinesGovernment (linguistics)Health careAccess to medicinesEconomic interventionismQuality (philosophy)Intervention (counseling)MedicineBusinessMarket accessPublic economicsMarketingPublic healthEconomic growthNursingEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Access to quality essential medicines at affordable price to patients in the healthcare market is one of the main goals of universal health coverage and health-related sustainable development goals. Healthcare market is imperfect, and the government cannot ensure access to essential medicines if the market is left to operate under invisible hand control. This scoping review was conducted with intention to provide the clear picture on impact of pharmaceutical price regulation on access to essential medicines, drug innovation and launching. Methods We searched articles written in the English language since January 2000 from PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Ovid/Medline and Google scholar with systematic search query. Results Access to essential medicines, which is defined in terms of availability, affordability, accessibility, acceptability and quality of drugs, can be improved by pharmaceutical price regulation. Countries can use different price regulation strategies based on their healthcare objectives and priority healthcare needs. Country-specific pharmaceutical price regulation could not significantly affect drug innovation and launching. However, supportive strategies such as open public funding for drug innovation research, providing innovation awards and strong patent rights can counterbalance the effect of price regulation on innovation and drug development research in developed countries. Conclusion Regulating pharmaceutical pricing system is one of the key strategies to ensure access to essential medicines. Countries that have implemented pharmaceutical price regulation system (Germany, the UK, Canada and Iran) have achieved better access to essential medicines. However, the US and Ethiopian health systems that are unregulated concerning pharmaceutical pricing had a great challenge of affordability of essential medicines. Therefore, setting country-specific pharmaceutical price regulation system along with additional strategies to improve drug innovation is critical to ensure access to essential medicines.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.192
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.347 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmaceutical Health Services ResearchSame topicPharmaceutical Economics and PolicyFrench-language works237,207