Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21740573›Full record

ArticlePhilosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM2011

Should patents for antiretrovirals be waived in the developing world? Annual Varsity Medical Debate--London, 21 January 2011.

Fenella Corrick, Robert Watson, Sanjay Budhdeo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Fenella CorrickOriel College, University of Oxford, Oriel Square, Oxford, OX1 4EW, UK.
Robert Watson
Sanjay Budhdeo

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The 2011 Varsity Medical Debate, between Oxford and Cambridge Universities, brought students and faculty together to discuss the waiving of patents for antiretroviral therapies in the developing world. With an estimated 29.5 million infected by Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) in low- and middle-income countries and only 5.3 million of those being treated, the effective and equitable distribution of anti-retroviral therapy (ART) is an issue of great importance. The debate centred around three areas of contention. Firstly, there was disagreement about whether patents were the real barrier to the access of anti-retroviral therapy in the developing world. Secondly, there were differing views on the effectiveness of a patent pool. Thirdly, concerns were raised over the impact of waiving patents on research to produce new and better anti retro-viral drugs.

Indexed as

Anti-Retroviral AgentsDeveloping CountriesDissent and DisputesHealth PolicyHealth Services AccessibilityHealth Services Needs and DemandHIV-1HIV InfectionsHumansIntellectual PropertyPatents as TopicUnited KingdomAnti-Retroviral Agents

Identifiers

PMID21740573
PMCPMC3160882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.